Archive for the ‘kat banyard’ tag
The recent ‘Topless Kate’ photos scandal displays two sexual double standards regarding voyeurism and privacy. In the first place, it comes only weeks after Prince Harry was involved in a similar scandal, in that nude snaps of himself also made their unwanted way into the public domain. However, whilst Princess Katie is being portrayed as an innocent victim of press harrassment and privacy violation, Prince Harry was castigated for bringing scandal (again) upon the Royal Family. Moreover, whilst no British newspaper would dare to publish Katie’s bouncing breasts, and even condemnend foreign publications for doing so, the SUN published Harry’s (censored) pics on its front page.
Some telling privacy distinctions emerged as a French tabloid published photos of Kate Middleton sunbathing topless on a guesthouse terrace in Provence.
No major British publication published the photos Friday – not even The Sun, which last month splashed photos of a nude Prince Harry partying in a Las Vegas hotel room on its front page.
It seems Harry was fair game because he was prancing naked among the (cell phone-wielding) strangers he’d invited to his hotel room. Meanwhile, the images of Kate’s sunbathing ritual on a “remote” property – including Will applying sunscreen to her thonged-rear end – have been widely slammed as an invasion of privacy…
..Beyond privacy, Trierweiler and Middleton’s cases raise the possibility of a gendered element to the uproar: Would people be as incensed were it Will’s rump on the cover of the French tab?
The second double standard involved in this is that in neither case is the question of ‘sexual voyeurism’ being raised, simply the issue of privacy. The reason for this is the demographic that these publications aim at, celeb and gossip magazines that will see their sales and profits rise many times for printing the photos (even at the cost of being sued).
It is overwhelmingly female.
The vast majority of the readers of Closer magazine are women. The vast majority of the people who will buy the French edition of Closer to examine the breasts of a princess, to check for imperfections, to bitch and to compare with their own commoner bossoms, are female. Thus, even though feminists at the European Union have forced member states to pass laws criminalizing ‘sexual voyeurism’, there is no question of the publications being charged. Britain’s Daily Mail, home of the femiservative voice of Middle-England, repeatedly publishes pictures of female celebrities inadvertently revealing their underwear, making themselves liable for prosecution under these laws. The same paper also regularly crows to its female readers when lonely old men are sent to prison to be raped for taking upskirt photos on spy cams (even if the photos are for personal enjoyment rather than to be posted online). Feminist activist Kat Banyard recently intimated that even viewing upskirt pictures online should be made illegal.
As you would expect from feminist sexual morality, it all depends on the gender of the person looking, and of the person being looked at.
The British sexual trade union, led again by Kat Banyard and her UK Feminista group, have been holding protests against the latest Miss World contest in London. For more information, read the excellent Human-Stupidity article at InMalaFide (warning – article does contain graphic images of the protestors).
Some feminists do appear to mellow with age, and learn to accept their departure from the free sexual market : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15692592
But it’s also the case that, since those bad old days, television and other mass media have committed crimes far worse than even the “un-reformed” Miss World ceremony did. This year’s competition included a couple of 17-year-olds, the Anna Karenina fan from Bosnia Herzegovina, and Miss El Salvador. Otherwise, just like they’ve been in all 60 years of the competition, they were a collection of young adults, up to (in the case of Miss People’s Republic of China) the age of 25.
This isn’t, in other words, the licensed child abuse (or that’s what it looks like to me, at any rate) that we watch on Britain’s Got Talent, where there is no age limit at all – you could enter your toddler if you wanted to – and where to see a prematurely-sexualised 11-year-old reduced to tears, or a vulnerable middle-aged lady driven to despair, seems to have become part of the pleasure of the show. A hundred, apparently robust, grown-ups in bikinis don’t seem quite as offensive as that.
It does appear that, at a street level, the demographic of sexual trade union politics is becoming younger, although still as hideous. Of course, street protests are nearly always the preserve of the young, but I wonder if it could also be because the unattractive young female, these days, is starting to feel the displacements caused by the free sexual market even more strongly than their older sisters?
Young women have now been brought up to feel they have a right to have a hundred male partners by the age of 21. When it doesn’t happen for these ugly ‘feministas’ then they are even more likely to want to lash out than their aging, and even uglier, older feminist brethren. Perhaps Kat Banyard is a symptom of this?
Here’s the youngest contestant in this years Miss World – the delightful 16 year old Miss Bosnia. And no, I’m not showing you a picture of Kat Banyard. Too early in the morning.
A British feminist organisation has held a protest over the opening of a new Playboy club in London. Screaming ‘women’s bodies are not for sale’, the hideous harridans screached loudly enough to earn a spot on BBC News : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13659661 (WARNING : Report contains extremely graphic images of ugly jealous feminists telling pretty girls what not to do with their own bodies).
Taking a look at the femiwhore’s website : http://www.ukfeminista.org.uk/ , you have to admit that they are a well-organized bunch of jealous psychos, with numerous regional and university groups carefully co-ordinated with each other.
The truth is that the men’s rights movement is still a long way from being big enough to achieve anything similar in terms of organisation and public protest.
Maybe in another 5 years time, we will be able to organize a counter protest at events such as this. All of us wearing green eyed monster masks whilst screaming that envy is the deadliest of sins and that men’s bodies and eyes are not for controlling.