Accidental nudity

25 May

Lingerie Football

 

I know I won’t be buying tickets to watch the Lingerie Football League because I have no interest in football. If I did and the women were good at it, I’d probably think about it.

What I do know is that players wearing lingerie neither entices nor repulses me. I have concerns about injury to exposed flesh that would make me squirm in visceral sympathy were I to witness that. However, in my experience exposure to flesh is interesting for a nano second, unless I’m personally and privately engaged with that flesh, which is a whole other ball game, so to speak.

Commissioner of moral police Melinda Tankard Reist is outraged at the possibility of the Lingerie Football League coming to Australia, to the degree that she has ordered her troops to set up the usual petition and boycott of every business with an interest in promoting what they perceive as sexualisation of women in sport.

One of the claims made by Reist’s battalion is that women who wish to play football at this level are forced to do it in their underwear because there are no options available. This is apparently untrue. A small exaggeration, by those who don’t let the truth get in the way of their propaganda. In the US, home of the LFL, there are three women’s football leagues, none of which require their members to play in their undies. So presumably the women involved in LFL are there because they want to be.

You’d never know this from reading Reist’s rant on the subject. Once again, women are positioned as victims, forced by men into sexualised exhibitionism if they want to play their sport.

In this interview with Derryn Hinch, Reist admits that she doesn’t like beach volley ball either because the uniforms, while not styled by Victoria’s Secret, are nonetheless far too skimpy. Wearing skimpy garments is exploitative of women, the argument goes, who only want the chance to play their sport. Men don’t watch the sport they watch the women’s bums and breasts, desperately hoping for wardrobe malfunctions and a bit of accidental nudity.

I don’t know if this is true or not, but if it is, it doesn’t seem so extraordinary. Heterosexual men are generally on the lookout for a glimpse of female flesh as far as I can tell, and I’ve yet to understand why that is regarded as offensive. Of course there are situations in which it is entirely offensive, but that isn’t every occasion and circumstance.

I have to admit that if I find myself trapped in a room with a television broadcasting the football, especially if it’s the Sydney Swans, I watch their bodies. I very much admire their athleticism and their bums. I suppose I’m objectifying them, but I mean them no harm. I also like to look at female athletes, especially the gymnasts. Human bodies can be powerfully beautiful. There is a very strong link in the human imagination between beauty, the erotic, and the sexual. When all is well with us we know better than to act out this link unless invited.

It is ludicrous to demand that the human gaze be bereft of sexual interest. To be sexually stirred by a human body is not to inevitably objectify. We are capable of simultaneous reactions: admiration and desire are companions.

The bottom line (sorry), as Helen Razer put it in a tweet yesterday, is that it’s demeaning to tell adult women they are being demeaned. One has to assume a position of  vast superiority in order to do this. Whatever their reasons, the women of the Lingerie Football League  have freely chosen their careers. Reist et al claim, as they always claim, that many women don’t know when they are being sexploited. These women are dumber than Melinda, in other words, and need to be taught what’s really going on here by taking their jobs away from them and telling them they don’t know their own minds.

This ongoing fight about sexualisation and objectification of adult women is really all about dress codes. As someone else said on Twitter, we wear bikinis to the beach, not bras and pants, but the amount of flesh revealed is the same. Reist and her gang start from the premise that the female body is a dangerous thing, dangerous for its inhabitants and dangerous for heterosexual men. Therefore it must be kept under control and one of the methods of control is how it is allowed to be clothed.

If to sexualise, that is to make sexual, is “wrong,” then it follows that sex outside of prescribed circumstances is wrong. To “sexualise” apparently means to display flesh and wear garments suggestive of the privacy of the bedroom.  If we “sexualise” the adult female we are apparently inciting heterosexual males who do not own her in marriage to inappropriate desire. Reist is primarily engaged in a form of attempted mind control: she doesn’t want men desiring women unless they are married to them. She is incapable of distinguishing between desire and objectification, therefore desire is her enemy.

I have no problem with Reist holding her opinions on sex and its purposes. She’s entitled to them. But what she must one day realise is that these opinions are not shared by everyone, and she has no right to attempt to impose them as the norm.

I give the final word to my friend H: “If we cannot do what we want with our own physical vessel (when it does no harm to others) we have/are nothing.”

 

Advertisements

135 Responses to “Accidental nudity”

  1. Hawkpeter May 25, 2012 at 10:15 am #

    As someone who is part of the preparation of the local Australian girls who are taking part in this new sport here in Australia, I can say that the focus is definitely more so on the game rather than the potential titillation.

    The game is the Lingerie Football League (LFL) in the US, that is what is visiting for this exhibition game, and they have women’s gridiron competitions there also; here its going to be the Ladies Gridiron League (LGL). The International Federation of American Football league (IFAF) endorses organized women’s gridiron with full equipment and there is a World Championships for this.

    MTR picking a fight on this issue is quite hilarious, but totally consistent with her attempts to ride the coat tails of anything that has potential to attract media attention, which the LFL here will no doubt try to do, as they are a sports entertainment business.

    Like

  2. AJ May 25, 2012 at 10:34 am #

    My young female cousin plays Womens AFL and was really proud to be selected for Victoria recently for their match in Adelaide (Go Jemma!!!) . MTR is welcome to approve – they wear standard football gear!

    Like

    • AJ May 25, 2012 at 10:36 am #

      OH one other thing, Julia Gillard sent her a personal letter when she was was leading goal kicker in her league a couple of years back. Now I’m not the biggest fan of Gillard but I have to admit to a rosy glow for the PM at such a nice touch. The family loved it and Jemma really deserved the appreciation.

      Like

      • Jennifer Wilson May 25, 2012 at 2:30 pm #

        Excellent! I’m glad to hear the PM takes an interest in young women’s sport. If I was a young woman now I’d be playing football for sure. It wasn’t an option back in the day.

        Like

      • Ray (novelactivist) May 25, 2012 at 4:29 pm #

        There’s been a boom in girls taking up AFL. I’m into soccer and the women’s league is impressive.

        The LFL does not take itself seriously. Its entertainment. Silly yes, but it’s not a real sport.

        Like

        • helvityni May 25, 2012 at 11:04 pm #

          I’m into soccer, and I agree it’s not to be played in your underwear, I’m not prudish but to tell the truth it is just terribly silly…keep your best lingerie for your bedroom…

          Does this silliness originate from America, like those Baby Beauty Pageants….those little girls ought to wash the lipstick off, put on their trackies and go and play any game…maybe teach them chess.

          Like

  3. Elisabeth May 25, 2012 at 11:00 am #

    I find myself thinking back to some of Gerald Murnane’s wonderful writing where he describes the excruciating pain of a young boy growing up in a repressed and repressive Catholic family where he is not allowed to see his young sister naked in the bath, and certainly not his mother without her clothes. He is curious about w omen’s/girls bodies but is given the message that they are off limits and that his curiosity is bad.

    On the other hand, his mother has no hesitation in seeing him naked when he takes his routine bath with his brother. It’s as if his body is available for all to see, except for his private parts which are again meant to be hidden and certainly not touched even by himself.

    I suppose some of the excess anxieties you describe here in relation to sexual desire and repression begin in childhood in situations such as Gerald Murnane describes.

    Thanks again for taking a stand on how much we need a more calm response to human sexuality and nudity, accidental or otherwise

    Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 25, 2012 at 2:35 pm #

      Hi Elisabeth. The demonising of perfectly natural curiousity causes endless trouble for individuals and societies, IMO. I think we retain that sexual curiousity about others well into adult life, if we ever really lose it. It’s misunderstood and condemned too often, with people being alienated and cast as deviant. Really the body is a blank slate on which people write whatever they need to. In itself, it is utterly harmless, I think.

      Like

  4. Sandra Grey May 25, 2012 at 11:13 am #

    What a fabulous article – MTR and her gang just don’t get it do they? Their rants are insulting to women – most women anyway – I think MTR and her fans are very weak insecure females and/or totally brainwashed by this whole highly religious message that nudity leads to temptation etc and good lord we just couldn’t have that could we? Love love this article.

    Like

  5. annodynenn O'Dyne May 25, 2012 at 11:25 am #

    HUMOUR! I assume and hope the founders of Lingerie Footy were being FUNNY. it is. HawkPeter said “MTR picking a fight on this issue is quite hilarious” – but unfortunately this is the only hilarious thing about MTR. I wish she would instead direct her energy and famewhoring onto some of the sad child-abuse cases in our society.
    I used to be appalled by the tighter-than-their-skin Olympic swim/track and beach knickers, until I realised, as with Brownlow WAGs gowns, that the games telecasts bring harmless joy to old men everywhere.
    The m-s media will go batshit over lingerie footy, as they did over Janet J’s ‘wardrobe malfunction’. I despair.

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 12:05 pm #

      Haven’t you heard?
      Sex is exclusively designed for monogamous Catholics to breed more of the same.

      On the other hand child sex abuse by priests?
      I’ll leave that for someone else to deny, cover up and weasel out of the consequences of.

      Chances are that very person will wear garments resembling ancient lingerie every Sunday.
      Smutty footy is the least of Reist’s problems and frankly (as usual) none of her business.
      (She must have bought a sea container of petitions.Got to fill them out somehow.)

      If she was a woman of her word she would personally walk onto the oval at half time and confront one of the girls face to face with her concerns.I would pay to see that.Ten times over.

      ***********************************************
      Visible Female Skin = exploitation
      Any non-monogamous non missionary position sex for non-procreation = Devils work.

      Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

      How anyone who demands to tell other people what they can and cannot do with their own adult body, can claim to be a feminist, is a bow so long,I could build a land bridge from here to Alaska with it, and have enough left over to knit thirty three more from here to the moon and back.
      Besides if Reist wants to make any of these girls unemployed by way of her morals, she should provide them with either an income stream equal to the lost job,or support the person until they find an equally fiscal position,which satisfies their needs.Good luck with that.

      Get a life, not a lawyer.

      Like

  6. Matthew May 25, 2012 at 12:42 pm #

    Melinda argues that there is “serious risk of injury” to players, but if was genuinely concerned she’d be petitioning the LFL to supply the players with better equipment. She is also concerned that “apart from All Star matches, they are not paid”. Why isn’t she petitioning the LFL to at least pay these women at least some money ($50 or something) for each match? She’s also stated there is no other option for women to play the sport (in Australia at least). Well why not petition the government to provide funding to established Gridiron clubs in Australia so they can have female teams?

    Apparently her solution to all of this is (unsurprisingly) to ban the LFL. If her claims that the women have no other choice to play the Gridiron but the LFL were true, doesn’t that seem counterproductive? How would removing their only way of playing the sport help at all?

    I really thought her interview with Hinch was quite telling. Imagine if Collective Shout put up a petition to ban women’s beach volley ball. She can deny it all she likes, but with slip up’s like the one with Hinch, she shows her true colours. Why does lunacy like this get airtime from the MSM?

    Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 25, 2012 at 2:37 pm #

      Reist twice expressed her objection to beach volley ball in that interview. And said male divers in tiny togs don’t have to worry about “accidental nudity” LOL.

      Like

  7. Ray (novelactivist) May 25, 2012 at 12:52 pm #

    The problem remains that, despite the many years of feminism, some women will still choose to appear in their underwear, send nude photos to lads magazines, enter the sex industry – simply because they have an exhibitionist streak and get a kick out of it. This may be a perfectly legitimate reason.

    Personally I find lingerie football bizarre.

    Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 25, 2012 at 2:38 pm #

      I think it’s OK for adults to decide how they are going to express their sexuality as long as it doesn’t involve illegal activities. And as you say, people always will.

      Like

      • Ray (novelactivist) May 25, 2012 at 3:52 pm #

        Of course there’s more to say – especially about the necessity of some degree of objectification in sex. Women objectify as much as men, except they tend to objectify ideal types as opposed to bodies. Real men do not fit the ideal, just as real women do not.

        As for legal/illegal – depends on who controls the law making process. Desire doesn’t much like rules.

        Like

  8. Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 1:04 pm #

    The concept of ‘accidentally nude’ is the equal and opposite to “deliberately ignorant”.

    The girls probably get a bonus when a hooter pops out. So what?
    Their bits.

    Priorities.

    Like

  9. Gruffbutt May 25, 2012 at 1:55 pm #

    Well said (as usual), Jennifer.

    I’m a big fan of football (not so much gridiron, but whatever) and a big fan of female flesh. Do I care about the lingerie football? Nope. Not unless it’s of a high standard as an athletic contest or highly amusing, neither of which I’m banking on.

    So where do you want to pigeon-hole me, Mel? Can two play this game?

    (Like the new format, Jen, and yes, same Gruffbutt, new email address…slack commentator, but interested reader.)

    Like

  10. Rosa Louverture May 25, 2012 at 2:12 pm #

    While there’s much here that I agree with, and I really do respect these women as athletes, I would feel much better about it all if the women in question were getting paid properly for what they were doing, and if the LGL was as popular and high profile as the LFL – i.e. that there was an option for women to choose whether or not they wore proper protective clothing and still get mainstream media coverage on their games.

    There are also stories of the league managers using union busting tactics on the players and other nastiness. http://fitandfeminist.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/ten-reasons-why-the-lingerie-football-league-sucks/ for more info. And the marketing …….. sex first, and THEN it’s thrown in that it’s a “real” sport (with real violence, real injuries) as the novelty factor.

    I’m no fan of MTR, and I particularly cringe at the “think of our girls, our innocent little girls, our daughters” etc. line. But personally, I am opposed to the treatment of LFL players, and think it’s more useful to raise the questions about why we don’t have more respect for women in sport than to defend the league.

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 2:24 pm #

      Soooooooooo,
      When you or anyone else can show me where and when MTR has made personal approaches to the girls them selves and has reached the conclusion (how it was reached) that they are oppressed and exploited and require/want unshackling from the fun/money/attention/travel/comradely/media exposure they have I will offer my ear.
      Till then this is more of the same bacwa crap.There opinions formulated elsewhere and promulgated here as fac.
      No-one frees anyone buy devaluing or removing personal choice, or by replacing those values, for their for own political and or religious expedience, fiscal benefit or media relevance.

      They look like big girls who can speak for themselves.
      Let them.I’m all ears.

      Like

      • Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 2:28 pm #

        EDIT Where’s my spellcheck Mozilla!!

        there opinions=their opinions
        here as fac.=fact
        comradely = camaraderie
        buy devaluing = by devaluing

        Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 25, 2012 at 2:41 pm #

      I agree that the athletes should be properly paid. Thanks for the link, and I’ll definitely check it out.

      Like

    • Matthew May 25, 2012 at 2:49 pm #

      Rosa, in the US women have the Independent Women’s Football League if they want to play. Real equipment, professional, no undies on display. Women in the US DON’T have to join the LFL to play gridiron. As I said before, if MTR is genuinely concerned about the treatment, payment, equipment, welfare etc of players, petition the LFL to change this, or support a female gridiron competition in this country. She has done neither. She doesn’t give a crap about women’s sport or the women involved in the LFL. She’s Mary Whitehouse dressed up as feminist. If the LFL is the only option for women to play gridiron in the country (as she claims), how come the “advocate for women” wants to remove this “only option”? And why is she not providing any alternatives to this “only option” to the women who want to play this sport?

      Like

    • Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 3:13 pm #

      Are you saying( proof please) that the women playing this sport in Australian are not being paid enough/at all?
      How much exactly do they get?.What other non-monetary reward does the employer provide.

      There’s enough trial by media of late.I hunger for the facts.Something not to be found in the the Zealotiicious Outrage Forums.

      Like

      • Matthew May 25, 2012 at 4:08 pm #

        There are pay discrepancies in a lot of sport (check out the differences in prize money between men’s and women’s pro surfing for instance). However as this has nothing to with sexual desire, nudity, female reproductive rights, or tacky products that bogans buy (i.e. Buddy’s t-shirts), it never crosses the radar of the self-described “advocate for women and girls”. However I truly believe she is concerned with the “exploitation of women’s bodies for profit”, as evidenced by her website. She often exploits images of women’s bodies (always without the model’s permission I might add) to beat companies and politicians into submission.

        Like

      • Caitlin May 25, 2012 at 9:27 pm #

        I don’t know the circumstance in Australia, but in the U.S. the league recently went from pro status, where the players were paid, to amateur status, where the players make nothing. Some of the players have been able to parlay their LFL careers into other promotional/modeling work, but as far as actually getting paid for playing for the LFL – that doesn’t happen anymore.

        Like

        • Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 11:34 pm #

          Hi Caitlin.
          I’m confused.
          Are you a feminist?
          An Australian feminist?
          A Catholic feminist?
          All of the above?

          You’re not Caitlin Roper are you?
          Paying your loyalty dues to MTR?

          http://community.collectiveshout.org/profile/CaitlinRoper

          Or are you this Caitlin? (As your link reflects.)

          http://fitandfeminist.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/the-problems-with-sketchers-shape-ups-for-girls/

          Would you like to declare your connection/affiliation to MTR /Collective Shout or have it declared by others?

          You said this:
          “I don’t know the circumstance in Australia, but in the U.S. the league recently went from pro status, where the players were paid, to amateur status,
          where the players make nothing. ”
          Cool.Amateurs don’t normally get paid do they?

          So can you say emphatically what these enslaved man-puppets are working for here in Australia? (They aren’t amateurs,they are performers i think?)
          How much $$$$$$

          I’ll ask again,and very clearly, “Are you saying( proof please) that the women playing/performing this sport/game/exhibition in Australian are not being paid enough/at all?
          How much exactly do they get?.What other non-monetary reward does the employer provide.”
          ___________________________
          Please spare the readers made up speculation.
          Do you claim “hot, enthusiastic, voluntary, athletic” (I know how dare I use labels!!!!!!! They arent mine) women are doing this for diddly? For love?
          Show me a pay-packet with a zero on it.(please)
          Or at least deliver a penniless victim or ten,(please).

          By the way WA is about to receive 1700 457 Visa workers.I trust you will do your best to save them from exploitation, despite the fact they will be male,foreign and probably not Christian.
          Many Thanks.

          Like

          • paul walter May 26, 2012 at 6:54 pm #

            The last half dozen or so posts have focussed on the the real issue of pay and conditions.
            n a post-industrial, deunionised economy, when it is harder to keep track of people’s living incomes and conditions.
            A generation ago young people, male or female, would have been fed into the industrial system at a local factory or shop say, with incomes low but at least steady and some basic protection should the boss get too dictatorial with workers.
            Caitlin’s comment is really just an example of life in the new century, old certainties have been removed and now many working people are now back to scrapping amongst themselves for the crumbs off the system’s table.
            I dont like market ideology either, but at the practical level, it is a world we have to take into consideration, adapting if possible to whatever realities confront us, as our ancestors did in the past in the jungles.

            Like

  11. paul walter May 25, 2012 at 2:43 pm #

    So the Grundys are Quixote-like again tilting at windmills. However, the WLFL has gone where no pioneer has gone before in accomplishing a successful separation of eroticism from sheer silliness,
    Sillyness is frillyness.
    A pause to consider Elisabeth’s point though, Humanity is barely 5000 years into an experiment called “society”,perhaps the first and only time a species has been in a position to atttempt this in the thirteen billion year history of a vast and expanding universe.
    We should not be surprised when we find atavistic elements of an older culture clinging like shredded placental material. It birthed us but no longer sustains us incurrent times. Techne revolutionised social relations, incidentally creating much suffering as society was organised for an artifical mode of production often for reasons little to do with the advance of civilisation or the collective’s survival. Collateral damage is the word am looking for.
    Just an aside.
    I can just remember, back in the seventies, the weather girl on an Adelaide teev station, who turned up in her team’s guernsey at finals time with nothing whatsover to obscure the view of endless leg climbing upwards to heaven. Ros, you were a goddess, truly- I so wanted to nurture your forward pocket, with its pert wings and trembling flanks, but you controlled my pivot and my balls went no where.

    Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 25, 2012 at 2:50 pm #

      PW, It is an honour to have you In the NPFS community also. Your way with words…brilliant.

      Like

  12. paul walter May 25, 2012 at 3:39 pm #

    Thanks Jen (looks at floors, blushes, moves foot.). Now am all twitterpated,

    Like

  13. samjandwich May 25, 2012 at 3:45 pm #

    As my German philosophy lecturer used to say: “and now for your amusement I vill interrupt ze lecture and tell you”, that the headline for this article reminded me of something I read in my local rag the Manly Daily recently, in which it was reported that there has been “an outbreak of alcohol-fuelled public nudity”. This is why I love the northern beaches – when we get drunk we don’t get mad, we just get even!

    But back to ze topic: this whole scenario is really interesting, and I still think there’s stuff going on here that we have difficulty enunciating. I for one don’t feel I have a particularly good understanding of why women would choose to play football in their underwear, and it seems to me that what’s missing here is the issue of how the players and the spectators might reconcile the disparities in each others’ views (though as we’ve heard the promoters, those vultures, probably don’t deserve a mention;-) .

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I enjoy looking at women’s bodies. There is nothing I can think of in the whole world that is more beautiful than a beautiful woman, and the act of looking makes me feel fulfilled in ways that transcend how I feel about the person I’m looking at. Even if I despise someone, I can still appreciate their appearance…

    …and in fact I would go so far as to say that a person’s appearance is an integral part of the way I think about them – because even if I despise someone, I feel as though my propensity to want to try and re-evaluate them and see them in a more positive light, is directly proportional to how physically attractive I find them. I’ve always had difficulty with the notion of someone “objectifying” someone else, because I think that a person’s body, or appearance, is a necessary and integral part to the way we think about others – and to the way others think about themselves. For example, think about reading a book: even if you don’t know what the author looks like you still develop a picture of what you think they should look like, or of what you think the characters should look like, based on the impression that the writing gives you, because it’s impossible to think of a disembodied person. Further, we take people’s bodies to be expressions of themselves. People will go to great lengths to change their bodies, as far as to change their sex, their skin and hair colour, their girth and shape, the number of wrinkles they have, in order to better express the way they feel about themselves, to themselves as well as to others, because the appearance of our bodies is so fundamental to the way we feel about ourselves.

    So I suppose what I’m saying is that I’d like to argue that it is constitutively impossible for, let’s say, a man, to look at a picture of a scantily-clad woman, and think of her as an object. He might of course deeply misconceive of her personality, her history, her preferences etc, but that’s purely an emotional intelligence issue. The *only way* I can see that it’s reasonable to claim that someone can objectify someone else by looking at them, is if the person looking is a sociopath – and contrary to the claims of MTR et al, not all men are sociopaths – though essentially this is one of the implications of what she is saying.

    So there’s that, But what I’d be interested to know more about, is how do women feel when they play football in their lingerie, and in particular, how do they feel about being ogled by people they will probably never meet? And I suppose from my position I would assume that, while there would be such a diversity of views amongst the players as to be almost indescribable, there might be a generalised tendency to feel bold, subversive, sexy, desireable, temporarily (perhaps less so than we might imagine) boosted to a higher rung on the social hierarchy, silly (in a fun way), childish, connected to a community, and detached from oppressive social normatives surrounding what clothing means. And I’d imagine they would feel a little self-conscious about their imperfections, and somewhat suspicious and fearful of how others might perceive them, but overwhelmingly proud and happy to be able to give other people enjoyment purely through taking their clothes off, and connected to thers in the sense of affirming that with our clothes off we are all pretty much alike… well, that’s how I would feel if I went out on a football field in my briefs (my personal preference is for what’s known technically as the “boxer brief, if anyone’s interested…), and I guess I can’t see how being female would make me feel any different.

    But am I right? And how would you feel if you knew I am making a judgement about the kind of person you are by looking at your body? Is this better or worse than being objectified?

    (oh, and I realise that this whole discussion poses a dilemma for ugly people, but this is getting long… to be continued, maybe??)

    Like

    • Ray (novelactivist) May 25, 2012 at 3:57 pm #

      Let them play in their everyday underwear!

      Like

    • Ann O'Dyne May 25, 2012 at 4:10 pm #

      commiserations PW on your ejection. no humour at that place. they would loathe lingerie footy but I urge you to think ’empowerment’ and Boadicea. virago. put (lingerie football) into image search. they wear helmets, knee and elbow guards and look really pumped and tough.

      JW – delete this comment if you feel I am hijacking your blog, but it’s relevant to nudity and hypocrisy.
      I want to describe February 2005 when I first discovered blogs I saw that of a now famous Melb woman (feminist) and she had a photo of her unclothed breasts, with her face cropped away.
      a lewd description of various fruit names for breast followed.
      I thought – OK this is what bloggers do, and I posted my own nude photo – with face.
      Well you would have thought I machine-gunned a kinder class. They tore me to shreds and I was in shock for weeks.
      Today I have read 20 comments at Skepticlawyer blog by one of my historic attackers, one who was unkind to me because in her own words, I am pretty and she isn’t (FFS), and while I was admiring her articulate comments on law and education, I wondered, still, why she was so cruel to me back then. and I cannot watch the Book*Show where her hypocrite hoyden pal performs.

      Even sweet chickens will rip into the weak one of a flock. Is it possible MTR may be so angry at this footy fun because secretly she wishes she could also athletically flaunt her cleavage and tanned thighs and scream “I am woman hear me roar.”

      Like

      • Jennifer Wilson May 25, 2012 at 5:28 pm #

        So of course I have immediately gone over there to see if I can tell who it is you’re talking about and I’m not sure!

        I too have suffered at the hands of various female peers, though not, I must say, for showing my breasts. I wish I’d done that as well, in retrospect, but I was always too shy about them. I gather your offence was to leave your head attached to the photo, thereby owning your knockers rather than dehumanising and objectifying them. Sometimes a woman just can’t win with these people.

        Like

      • paul walter May 25, 2012 at 10:58 pm #

        No Ann O’Dyne, they’re good guys, on most issues I’d agree with their sentiments because they are usually mine also, expressed with more finesse than I could muster.
        Invariably when gender issues turn up there is friction. I’m not a perfect individual but a visit to this or the old LP site has always had me turning away again with a feeling that I am some sort of conflation in their minds of what a paedophile, wifebeater and slavering redneck axe murder all rolled into one must be.
        Too many scrapes with them, maybe the next life…Its a pity women and men can never experience what its like to be someone else, in another functioning body and live that life for a moment,including as the owner feels it.

        Like

      • paul walter May 25, 2012 at 11:38 pm #

        Occurs to me that if my footyclub was to have a team in this league my team would be wearing white red and blue knickers, interesting combo?
        Scepticlawyer has had a chequered history with me also, the last time ended when the brilliant but erratic principle got on the McCarthyite soap box she’s partial to that keeps drawing her back to it like a magnet and I thought, “leave it, it’s
        sphinx-like”.
        They were giving Lorenzo a run as thread writer last time I checked, I noticed one of your comments but it was all a bit cryptic so came back here.

        Like

    • Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 5:56 pm #

      Are nuns not objectified ?

      I think the crusaders in this war on non-existent demons are deliberately trying to make the word ‘objectified’ be a subliminal trigger for abused/assaulted/exploited/oppressed, thereby implying force and coercion are present in the display of ALL depictions of the female body,unless approved by them.
      I said it in an earlier comment, but these women/girls/people are doing what they choose until THEY say otherwise.
      This is not China,Russia or Mars.
      They have voices and are free to use them.
      They have bodies and ditto for them.
      They own THEIR bodies,their minds,brains and hearts.
      It’s their temple.If THEY choose to celebrate or desecrate it,as adults, that’s their choice.

      I’m still all ears and await the news of the first ten to claim asylum in the arms of their Christian saviours.
      If it does ever happen,I’ll bet it’s the day after pay-day.

      Like

      • paul walter May 27, 2012 at 6:39 pm #

        You’re good when you get serious Hypo. Your concept leaves open the sense in a reader of life as journey to be enjoyed not a punishment to be endured.
        With their fearful Manicheanism life can be never be more than extended penance for what David Bowie once described as, “guilt for dreaming”. All this execration and abnegation!
        Yes, it is right that people are humbled every so often, that’s life, there are consequences and if you are like me you sometimes get a glimpse of yourself you don’t like as an upshot.
        But the NewTestament evolved specifically to refute the Old Testament sack cloth and ashes- life is also progressive and processive and you can’t deny people the right to explore life, some times making incredibly stupid and self indulgent mistakes,because that’s what it is.
        But with the likes of MTR, its all zero tolerance,
        No redemption, no acknowledgement for effort when you do try to do the right thing, only condemnation when your best efforts fail on their impossible standards, until you finally err, at least in their unforgiving assessment.
        This is a mole whacking, contrarian and thuggish bikie of a god. Where is God’s compassion in this conception?
        How can you ever learn from your mistakes; experience life, if you never commit them because you’re too terrified to live or even move?
        As others have said here, you can’t win with them.
        MTR needs to get a new slant on life that gets her off her “down” on everyone else and restores some sort of Aristotelian “mean” into her life, some sense of proportion and balance to ameliorate the ugly looking, self-presentationary judgementalism that seems the hall mark of her utterings.

        Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 26, 2012 at 7:14 am #

      Beautifully enunciated, SamJandwich. I’ve just been directed to Martha Nussbaum’s “consensual objectification” theory in which she argues that to objectify is not necessarily a negative act. I cna’t say anymore because I haven’t finished reading it but I like the cut of her jib. Mind you, I am quite a fan of hers.

      I always very much enjoy your unabashed celebration of physical beauty.

      I’m also inclined to agree with your theory that perhaps it is only sociopaths who objectify, or psychopaths, and that the rest of us experience powerful combinations of admiration, desire and yearning that are entirely healthy and intend no harm to anyone.

      Please continue with your argument because I want to know what happens when there is little physical attractiveness.

      Like

  14. paul walter May 25, 2012 at 3:50 pm #

    You’re stuck with me any way. Just got booted off Hoyden for correcting an adhominem thrown my way, have never been able to figure what constitutes a fair go with these people.

    Like

  15. Ray (Novelactivist) May 25, 2012 at 5:35 pm #

    It seems Lumby attacked the LFL in the Senate today. Don’t you love when politicians waste time on populist trivia?

    And what’s MTR and her cohort got against beach volleyball? This is the problem with such campaigns. They are arbitrary. The issue is modesty in sport. Yet as any decent perv knows the action is in women’s gymnastics, swimming, diving, water polo, and so on. And those interested in the male form need only look at the running track or cycling. I seem to recall a bit of fuss over Matt Shirvington’s junk on display in some of his events, especially the comments over his size.

    In fact there’s a number of websites dedicated to wardrobe malfunctions in sport – camel toes, nip slips, wedgies, etc.

    I published a few photos to illustrate the absurdity of modesty in sport. The Greeks had it right. Nude up (well, except for maybe the Winter Olympics).

    http://novelactivist.com/10294/sport-and-nudity/

    Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 26, 2012 at 7:21 am #

      Yikes! How uncomfortable those clothed athletes look. I’ve tweeted that link Ray, thank you. I’ve never understood how people like Reist can believe sexiness can be corralled by clothing. Sometimes covered to the neck won’t conceal sexuality, indeed it can emphasise it.

      Like

      • Ray (Novelactivist) May 26, 2012 at 9:33 am #

        Except she doesn’t wish to conceal sexuality as such. She wants to conceal the kind of sexuality she doesn’t like, that makes her uncomfortable. This is the lie behind her campaigns. She is not actually against sexualisation, just certain types of sexualisation.

        This is based on a complete misunderstanding of how sexual arousal works. When ever something is made taboo other things are sexualised in compensation. Cover bodies all you like, then the sight of a naked hand or ankle will excite the sexual imagination.

        Like

  16. Lacy de la Garza May 25, 2012 at 5:59 pm #

    “If we cannot do what we want with our own physical vessel (when it does no harm to others) we have/are nothing”? Eh… I disagree Jennifer. If we do what we want when we want it with our physical vessel, how have we become anything more than animals giving in to our base desires? Having control over oneself whether it be with food drink or even thoughts really shows the differences between humanity and animation, IMHO.

    Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 25, 2012 at 6:20 pm #

      You’re assuming that what we all want to do with our physical vessels is indulge them. But we might wish to discipline them also, no?

      Like

      • Lacy de la Garza May 26, 2012 at 1:42 am #

        Definitely a possibility, but you have to give me that it is not a common interpretation based on the quote referenced. Do what we want with our own physical vessel could definitely mean balancing excessive indulgence with astute discipline, but perhaps this would bring up different interpretations on where that proper balance lies.

        Like

        • doug quixote May 26, 2012 at 7:25 am #

          The point is that no-one else is entitled to prescribe in what way a person does what they want with their own bodies (subject to the usual caveats too boring to repeat).

          My enduring campaign is against the banning and censoring wowser agenda (bacwa) and MTR is a would-be leading bacwa here in Australia. You have more than your share in the USA.

          Like

        • Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 10:04 am #

          Lacy,
          Would you have commented if the words read “It’s my body I’ll do what I bloody well like with it”

          Either way it’s written, it is a concept (which the groups you don’t like being accused of) ,will not accept.Usually their ‘God’ deals with decisions like personal usage policy, or the voices they alone hear draft the terms and conditions.
          Hence the ground hog day process of petitions and people creating problems / outrage which don’t exist,to lift their own ‘ratings’.
          As for the lingerie gridiron faux outrage, I’m still waiting to hear from the girls themselves, or the tyrant/s who chains them to a tree at night with bread and water.

          Like

    • Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 6:38 pm #

      Hi Lacy,

      They were actually MY words, and subsequently gifted to JW. I took your view on board, albeit long enough to visit your website to see why you may need me to clarify my words a bit.
      I think upon revision,I am happy enough to not turn a sentence into a major constitutional document.
      I think those who were met to get the sentiment will.

      IMHO pro-lifers, religious lobbyists, extremist politicians, zealots, bigots and xenophobes are the least likely demograph, to get what they mean.To be frank I could never live long enough for such a worthy education program.
      So it is natural that those words may go over many heads.Too many heads in fact.That’s OK.

      I guess there are some sentiments in the sentence you refute, which also apply to our hearts and minds to.
      Some call it ‘free will. Choice. A rare and precious commodity.Something which is totally incompatible with many authoritarian religions.

      But alas, I digress.
      I’m glad the words stimulated you enough to comment,even though we disagree a little over the value of them.That’s diversity for you!
      And diversity is a wild and reckless beast, and no-one mends the fences, to reign it in.
      Some of us think that’s how it should be.Me for one.
      Viva la diversity!

      Like

      • Lacy de la Garza May 26, 2012 at 1:39 am #

        How nice of you to group me with zealots and bigots and authoritarians. Lifelong dream achieved!

        Thank you for taking the time to explore my background before commenting, but no thank you for choosing to insult it anyway. That’s diversity?

        Like

    • hudsongodfrey May 25, 2012 at 7:57 pm #

      Lacy,

      Newsflash! We are animals. Apes to be precise, but an intelligent strain that sometimes takes greater pleasure in delayed gratification than carnal abandon.

      So there’s nothing wrong with self control but like anything too much of a good thing can be bad for you, (that’s what too much means). So surely the recommendation to self control can also be taken too far, even if Mr Spock could only have reached than conclusion by pure logic!

      Like

      • Lacy de la Garza May 26, 2012 at 1:36 am #

        Well, on your final point I must agree! There can definitely be extremes on both sides of the spectrum.

        Like

  17. Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 6:01 pm #

    Here’s an anthem which seems to almost fit this .No idea why.
    I think it’s the ‘Loon’ factor.

    Tennessee Bird Walk
    (Jack Blanchard & Misty Morgan Lyrics)

    Tennessee Bird Walk Lyrics

    Take away the trees and the birds
    All have to sit upon the ground, uum
    Take away their wings and
    The birds will have to walk to get around
    And take away the bird baths
    And dirty birds will soon be ev’rywhere
    Take away their feathers and
    The birds will walk around in underwear
    Take away their chirp and the
    Birds will have to whisper when they sing
    And take away their common sense and
    They’ll be headed southward in the spring

    Oh remember my darling
    When spring is in the air
    And the bald headed birds
    Are whisp’ring ev’rywhere
    You can see them walking
    Southward in their dirty underwear
    That’s Tennessee Bird walk

    How about some trees so the birds
    Won’t have to sit upon the ground, uum
    How about some wings so the
    Birds won’t have to walk to get around
    And how about a bird bath or two
    so the birds will all be clean
    How about some feathers so their
    Underwear no longer can be seen
    How about a chirp so the birds
    Won’t have to whisper when they sing
    And how about some common sense so they
    Won’t be blocking traffic in the spring

    Oh remember my darling
    When spring is in the air
    And the bald headed birds
    Are whisp’ring ev’rywhere
    You can see them walking
    Southward in their dirty underwear
    That’s Tennessee Bird walk

    source: http://www.lyricsondemand.com/j/jackblanchardmistymorganlyrics/tennesseebirdwalklyrics.html

    __________________________________________________
    It seems to me there’s only one mob trying to take away their chirp.
    And boy,they sure make up for it.

    Like

  18. hudsongodfrey May 25, 2012 at 7:09 pm #

    Okay so maybe the Lingerie football league is predominantly about attractive women performing in a competitive arena an activity designed to be admired as a form of entertainment. Maybe fans should even own the ogling?

    But then the question I’d ask is what is it that is admirable and entertaining about any sport. Is the art of coaxing balls between posts or into holes even faintly devoid of phallic and Freudian symbolism?

    I mean does anyone complain about male swimmers competing in trunks? Not to mention professional wrestling, which isn’t even a real sport, but does feature a lot of very well built, lets call them gentlemen for fear of repercussions, either in similar trunks to the swimmers or at least generally shirtless and covered in oil. And people think gladiator movies are gay soft porn!?

    I say we go back to the original Greek concept of the Olympics and have athletes compete in the nude. We could do it in London next month except that Aussie games officials might hark back to the episode with Dawn Fraser and exclude women who unfurl the wrong flag, that of Tasmania!

    Anyone who tempts me to post Amanda Palmer’s video is welcome to do so!

    Like

    • Ray (novelactivist) May 25, 2012 at 8:56 pm #

      Hey Hudson, don’t forget female wrestling!

      Like

      • hudsongodfrey May 25, 2012 at 10:12 pm #

        Yes of course i neglected to mention that there are a number of women involved in the show that is professional wrestling in the US. And I gather some of the back story behind their characters has elements to it that would themselves enrage any self respecting feminist.

        Part of the reason I overlooked it was because I was teasing out any double standard that may apply between male and female sports.

        Some people will watch jelly wrestling and dwarf tossing, and for all I know they’re regarding these things as serious sports.

        I was more seriously concerned with ferreting out what it is that drives an objection to one thing and not the other other. Why the titillation involved in lingerie clad gridiron seems to draw disapproval whereas the often violent nature of the professional male game which is under heavy fire for brain injuries still doesn’t draw the same level of condemnation.

        Maybe the test of whether it is really a proper sport or not has something to do with caring less who the winner is. But then as anyone who watches QI or any number of other similar panel/game shows knows winning isn’t always the most enjoyable part.

        So in the end the business of telling others what they’re supposed to be allowed to enjoy or not seems to be a fairly arbitrary exercise in approval or disapproval that we either can’t do properly at all because objective standards elude us, or that requires we apply to some agreed standard about which we seem equally unlikely to agree.

        Like

        • Ray (Novelactivist) May 26, 2012 at 9:42 am #

          Okay 🙂 And that’s the thing that drives me nuts. It’s all so arbitrary. What’s the issue here. Gridiron? Lingerie? Or just the combination of gridiron and lingerie? You and I know this is irrational and selective and based purely on personal dislikes. MTR doesn’t like it therefore it is wrong, therefore it is harmful.

          Like

          • hudsongodfrey May 26, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

            Yep and if you meant to construct that as a Syllogism then I doubly agree.

            This involves a display of flesh.
            I don’t like displays of flesh like this.
            Therefore I take offence.
            I regard offence as harmful.
            Therefore this is harmful.

            Oh and then we’ll go off and find a bunch of event based “studies” that reinforce our confirmation bias .So that when anyone predisposed to accept them uncritically asks it seems just like we’ve thoroughly rationalised equating our offence with harm.

            Like

  19. paul walter May 25, 2012 at 7:30 pm #

    Jennifer invokes the stark spectre of IMMEDIATE discipline immediately commanded and implemented.
    A Rataan switch or cane is flexed, whistling through the air preparatory to the invocation of its task by shadowy figures unrecognisable in the gloom, figures masked and garbed in medieval apparel, almost like Roman Inquisitonaries
    Pairs of buttocks facing back from tables as the prone proprietors face down, like beached whales, whine fearfully through quivering flesh…surely, not without reason??
    Or BECAUSE there is no good reason…?!

    NnnnneeeeeeyyyyyyyyyyyaaaaaaaaahhhHHHHaaaa!!!

    Like

  20. Hypocritophobe May 25, 2012 at 9:00 pm #

    “Hit me with your rhythm stick,hit me slowly,hit me quick
    Hit me,
    Hit me,
    Hit moyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!”,

    Like

    • doug quixote May 26, 2012 at 7:13 am #

      I prefer : “I dribble when I widdle cos’ my middle is a riddle” Drury was a classic.

      Like

  21. doug quixote May 25, 2012 at 10:14 pm #

    Just another rabbit for the bacwa types to chase.

    “When will they ever learn” as the old song goes;

    “Probably never” seems inevitably to be the answer.

    Like

    • annodyne May 26, 2012 at 8:21 am #

      well that sure is ugly. wordpress needs a Preview option.

      Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 26, 2012 at 1:42 pm #

      I don’t delete much, only if people get nasty with one another or put me at risk of defamation action even more than I do myself. LOL.

      Like

  22. Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 9:48 am #

    Maybe this link works better Ann Odyne

    http://w0rn0ut.blogspot.com.au/

    Like

  23. Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 10:39 am #

    HI HW,
    Not sure if it’s just my PC,but when I hover my cursor over the new links to latest Tweets, there seems to be this weird jumpy thing going on.
    Like the thing is unstable.(The lowest one?)
    It was happening late yesterday and still is today.
    Not sure what would cause that at either end but worth letting you in case others are the same.No biggy.
    The blue is settling in nicely.

    Blue by you!
    (bayou)

    The Big O
    Mind you Linda Ronstadt’s version is not too shabby.

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 10:43 am #

      HW?

      Try JW

      Maybe my keyboard and mouse are fecked.
      Not many visible letters left.

      Like

    • hudsongodfrey May 26, 2012 at 12:14 pm #

      Okay so what’s happened is that you can often set a different font or colour of font to display as you cover a text link with your mouse cursor. This pre-selection cue lets you know what you’re about to click in addition to signalling that the text link is in fact click-able.

      In this case because the two fonts are different kinds or sizes the line of text appears to jump as it reformats the text spacing when you hover. In computer speak I believe the appropriate excuse is that it is a feature not a bug!

      Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 26, 2012 at 1:47 pm #

      I don’t get any instability this end Hypo.
      I can’t decide if I like Orbison or Ronstadt’s version best.
      Have you heard Chris Hillman *At Edward’s Barn* If you like country it is excellent.

      Like

      • doug quixote May 26, 2012 at 5:36 pm #

        Poor Roy – a lovely timbre to his voice, but it tended to be flat – a real distress for anyone with relative pitch, let alone those with perfect pitch.

        So, if you must, go with Warwick. (personally I prefer Vivaldi, Bach and Handel, but each to his/her own)

        Like

  24. Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 12:36 pm #

    In case anyone gets peckish at interval.

    http://www.reistpopcorn.com/

    Like

  25. Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 2:30 pm #

    In case you are NOT outraged by this lingerie gridiron here’s two ways you can express yourself to the event organisers.Support the participants,if you choose, or counter some of the ridiculous claims.

    Its contacts for the Brizzy Ent. Centre

    The top link needs to be cut and pasted into the search window at the top of your browser (It may go direct when I upload to NPFS.)
    The bottom is the email address.
    You will also notice Lady Gaga is coming.
    I do hope she will be flashing some flesh.
    I’m just hanging out more more outrage and the next petition.
    These international visitors must love coming to visit QLD.

    http://www.brisent.com.au/Contact.aspx

    bec@brisent.com.au

    You best be quick,I heard a rumour they may be knocking the place down soon so they can frack for gas
    😉

    Like

  26. helvityni May 26, 2012 at 2:56 pm #

    I am really baffled by this lingerie football. Can someone please explain to me what this is all about, what’s wrong in wearing ordinary sport’s gear…
    Do we have men playing football in their underwear? I’m not interested in MTR’s views, nor am I against nudity, but why on earth should we adopt this practice in Australia?

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 3:23 pm #

      Well Helvi,
      It’s about some peoples need to suppress everything they disagree with versus the another view.
      The second not having a hidden religious agenda.

      We still (just) have choice.
      A bit like turning off/or over on your TV.
      (Enjoy that,Helvi the coalition will be limiting choice real soon.)
      It’s not my cup of tea either.But it’s not the cancerous exploitation of women/girls either.
      I’d prefer to use our energy stopping religious brainwashing.There’s far more damage (sometimes irreversible done there).
      Or animal cruelty,illegal wars, etc.
      The list is longer than the equator of things to worry about.
      If adult women want to do this so be it.(Within the usual safeguards)

      Cross country nun, egg and spoon racing anyone?

      Like

      • helvityni May 26, 2012 at 11:13 pm #

        Thanks for that Hypo, luckily we could still watch the Euro vision Song Contest….Gerard is miffed because I have not to stopped laughing at Dutch entry…still I have gotten over my disappointment over the Finnish not getting into the finals, at least the Swedish, Norwegian, Danish ,Icelanders and Estonian are still in the game… 🙂

        Like

        • Hypocritophobe May 27, 2012 at 12:14 am #

          The Irish dudes seem to have garnered a cult following via the cyber world.They sure look the part.
          I have not watched much,but Englebert Humperdinck??
          (Speelcheck not fond of him either!)

          Like

          • doug quixote May 27, 2012 at 7:46 am #

            You have a Spellchecker? I’d hate to see the originals!

            Like

            • Hypocritophobe May 27, 2012 at 10:00 am #

              The ‘spiel check’ was overheating DQ.
              So I let it all go through to the keeper, anyway.
              You’re right.

              The original attempts were ugly They would turn you into a ‘pillow’ of salt.

              Like

    • Ray (Novelactivist) May 26, 2012 at 6:59 pm #

      There is no rational explanation. It’s popular in the US. Someone thinks it will work here. I expect it will fail.

      Like

      • Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 7:35 pm #

        Ray I have never, ever seen two sentences work in as complete a symmetry as possible, as the two first sentences above you posted to Helvi.
        Yes the USA.
        It sure can be whole different kettle of snakes.
        (No doubt thats why someone things QLD is an ideal target.(Works for me!)

        Hugh Hefner for President and Sarah Palin for First Lady.
        +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        segue
        More bizarre ‘sports’ heading to QLD (Not all USA)
        (Zorbing for me.)

        http://www.intenseexperiences.com/bizarre-sports.html

        Helvi I think wife carrying may be your sport.

        Sure to be at least one here for Gerard as well

        http://www.odditycentral.com/tag/weird-sports

        Like

    • hudsongodfrey May 26, 2012 at 8:24 pm #

      The lure of quick buck to be had, until the novelty value wears off, probably has something to do with it.

      I suppose if you were to take a cynical view of what it might take to confect an all round sports entertainment package then it is probably easier to see this working than cricket. It may just come down to a matter of taste.

      Like

      • Hypocritophobe May 26, 2012 at 8:51 pm #

        I’d go even further HG and say that there are probably girls/young women queuing up to get a guernsey in this gig.
        And like anyone with half a brain knows whatever the ‘asset’ attribute, talent, feature,quality etc,,it has a use by date.
        That tells me these girls/women are savvy.Way savvy.
        More savvy than their pretend salvation stormtroopers.

        And at the risk of repeating these poor exploited possums in pink, again:

        “As for the lingerie gridiron faux outrage, I’m still waiting to hear from the girls themselves, or the tyrant/s who chains them to a tree at night with bread and water.”

        Like

        • gerard oosterman May 26, 2012 at 11:08 pm #

          Why play rugby or football in any kind of uniform? Why play rugby? ( if that’s the game you are referring to)

          Like

          • Hypocritophobe May 27, 2012 at 12:29 am #

            No, gridiron is different to rugby, G.
            It has no rules and Fleetwood Mac do the soundtrack.
            The players have a choice of wearing kitchen equipment and cooking utensils under their tracksuits (with matching motorbike helmets), or three strategically placed bandaids if they are female and nubile.

            Rugby is the game where a finger in the butt (by the opposition tackler) never used to be frowned upon,but is now outlawed.
            I don’t remember the zealots objecting to that, though.
            Perhaps it’s a revered religious ritual?

            I see nothing stimulating in rugby either, but then I’m a working class AFL watcher.
            I’m sure rugby fans hate that also.

            Each to his own.
            A universal message which most of us here can relate too.
            Which in many ways is where it should begin and end— —-with many things.
            I don’t tell the god botherers to rip their gear off,so they shouldn’t tell me or anyone (adult) else to rug up.
            And then some…

            As for uniforms.
            Imagine naked bull riding or mountain bike racing?
            Some of the winter sports may challenge the egos of naked male competitors.
            But I have it on good authority a bit of permafrost doesn’t worry you!!!!

            Like

    • Jennifer Wilson May 27, 2012 at 8:13 am #

      Hi Helvi, I think some women enjoy displaying their bodies, and I guess there’s a certain novelty in doing it while playing a traditional men’s sport. It’s like saying: I’m tough enough to play this game and I’m still feminine and sexy.

      It doesn’t bother me if adult women want to do it. It does bother me that religious wing nuts decide they are going to stop them!

      Like

      • paul walter May 27, 2012 at 6:02 pm #

        JW; “…I think some women enjoy displaying their bodies”.
        The serial offenders on this score are female activists.
        Iv’e not met a group of women so fiercely keen on peeling off their over the shoulder boulder holsters publically for the predilection of amazed onlookers, than female activists.

        Like

  27. Hypocritophobe May 27, 2012 at 12:34 am #

    Take a good look at the butler,

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-26/butler-charged-over-vatican-leaks/4035486

    because this is likely to become the age old magician trick of ;
    ” Now you see him!

    Now you don’t ! “

    Like

    • gerard oosterman May 27, 2012 at 7:39 am #

      Perhaps outdoor sport of chess in lingerie might be nice. I can imagine the black queen being moved across the board taking down a pale and surprised looking bishop.

      Like

      • doug quixote May 27, 2012 at 12:46 pm #

        Chess! Ha! It should banned :

        Whenever a Bishop can advance to take a Queen and then mate a King, and all over the board there is porn, er, pawns, lurking and secretly lusting to become Queens!

        Disgusting!

        Ban it now. Come on MTR, an article or three are needed.

        Like

  28. gerard oosterman May 27, 2012 at 2:15 pm #

    And those dirty pawns looking up the bishop’s frock. No wonder they all have bad habits, the bestiality of strange leaping knights all horsing about with two thrusts forward and one sideways…Disgusting! What will the little ones think of it?

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe May 27, 2012 at 2:24 pm #

      And IMHO nothing ends the game quicker than a stale mate.

      Like

  29. Hypocritophobe May 27, 2012 at 10:20 pm #

    Let’s see if MTR can lead QLD and Australia to a victory greater than this?

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-27/lady-gaga-indonesia-concert-off-after-threats/4036038

    Petition pending ………………………

    Like

    • paul walter May 28, 2012 at 1:36 am #

      Hypo, that’s beaut.
      It’s amazing that one of the world’s oldest and most intricate cultures is the very near neighbour of a country that is Scandinavia in the sun or North America in the South hemisphere.
      We know so little about hundreds of millions of people just like us and they so little of us,
      Lady Gaga breaking into Indonesia of course is quite amusing, it’s a very conservative country still and you just wonder if it wasn’t a publicity stunt.
      Remember the Bali bombing and what motivated it?
      My bet is there may have been a bit of quiet work in backrooms in a couple of countries to snuff the tour, before her actual presence became sufficiently a taunt to arouse fundy puritanism and possible political violence there.

      Like

    • doug quixote May 28, 2012 at 6:47 am #

      Lady Gaga is an amazing talent and very intelligent. As long as she doesn’t fall off those shoes . . .

      Interesting isn’t it how the fundamentalists of Christianity and those of Islam both seek to enforce their own morality upon everyone else.

      Like

  30. Julia May 28, 2012 at 3:16 pm #

    MTR is into Derryn Hinch…oh gosh…that just about says it all!!!

    Like

      • Matthew May 28, 2012 at 6:11 pm #

        Really could have done without the picture of Capper in his short shorts. Melinda really has crossed the line this time.

        I also noticed with the images in her blog posts about the Lovable underwear/Jennifer Hawkins adverts as well, note how Melinda vertically stretches the images slightly of most of the LFL players. Is this a deliberate attempt to create an impression that the women are thinner than they really are?

        Like

      • Hypocritophobe May 28, 2012 at 6:44 pm #

        For a woman who claims to find the exposure of female soft porn and other images offensive,she sure uses a heap on her online magazine,
        [“Old Idea”.Or is it “Womens Weakly”.]

        I saw a young woman’s buttocks exposed!!!
        Oh no!!
        (Not sure who has the copyright for the image or whether the girls were asked warned,either.)
        (Would MTR profit (directly or indirectly) from the images as well.)
        If so, Is that not pot,kettle black.?

        AND:

        Isn’t it a little outside the jurisdiction of Kate Cooper who links to this education/support provider(
        http://www.southernteachingunit.vic.edu.au/ )(Which is also a member of this http://www.safeschoolscoalitionvictoria.org.au/member-schools) who promote :

        “We aim to reduce homophobia and transphobia in schools, and to create learning environments where every student can learn, every teacher can teach, and every family can belong.”

        …and who said this:
        _____________________________________________________________________
        If you look up the term Lingerie, this is one of the definitions:
        “Lingerie is flattering or racy garments that are worn either under the clothes or as a prelude to sexual intercourse” – surely if they are not “intending” to sexualise the females in this sport they wouldn’t use the word lingerie in their name!!!
        _____________________________________________________________________
        She must have searched high and low to find something agreeing with her outrage, and the position of the ‘BACWAs.
        So I tried a search;
        I typed the words in Ms Coopers definition { Lingerie is flattering or racy garments that are worn either under the clothes or as a prelude to sexual intercourse”} into the search engine:
        The first search came up with this:
        http://www.shiteilike.com/how-to-buy-lingerie-for-an-f-buddy/
        How strange?
        My computer blocked the site. HD porn perhaps??
        I wonder if she went further.I wasn’t game.

        Then I added the ” in front of the word lingerie (in her definition) and got this at the top of google:
        (Got this result ,sorry if it runs off the page-but you can use the keywords I did)
        http://www.google.com.au/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22Lingerie+is+flattering+or+racy+garments+that+are+worn+either+under+the+clothes+or+as+a+prelude+to+sexual+intercourse%E2%80%9D&meta=&oq=%22Lingerie+is+flattering+or+racy+garments+that+are+worn+either+under+the+clothes+or+as+a+prelude+to+sexual+intercourse%E2%80%9D&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=firefox-hp.12…2882.10715.0.12620.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.eish..0.0.q07RWv6oz3o

        Sitting just under the results page it said about that word combination;
        No results found for “Lingerie is flattering or racy garments that are worn either under the clothes or as a prelude to sexual intercourse”.
        Strange??
        When I did a NORMAL person search I got these at the top.(lingerie as the key word!)

        Why not choose the first one on the *lingerie* search ?

        lin·ge·rie/ˌlänZHəˈrā/
        Noun:
        Women’s underwear and nightclothes.

        Or the second most poular definition here,
        http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lingerie

        I’d like to know exactly where her definition came from.No evidence on the MTR site.Typical.
        I wonder if she teaches her students how to vote too?
        And which religion is best?
        And that evolution is a conspiracy?

        I wonder if she tells her students that a bedroom is a nasty evil place people go to to have nasty sexual intercourse with each other.Or does she shop for a sanitised version of the definition of the “bridal chamber”,too.

        Keep the fear coming.Stay away from your shopping centre folks, you may see the Shagging Uniforms out the corner of your eye.
        What has happened to the education system?
        What happened to facts?
        I feel let down.Can I say ‘led up the garden path’?
        ________________________________________________________________
        “where every student can learn, every teacher can teach, and every family can belong.”

        Unless of course you or your family watch,support or play Lingerie football.

        Like

        • Jennifer Wilson May 28, 2012 at 9:39 pm #

          You got automatically mediated because of that long bit. I’ve released you!

          Like

          • Hypocritophobe May 28, 2012 at 10:23 pm #

            Cool, I’m free.
            😉

            Like

        • doug quixote May 28, 2012 at 10:52 pm #

          The definitions of lingerie remind me of an old joke about leg men : “legs? ha! they are the first things you push aside!”

          Like

          • Hypocritophobe May 28, 2012 at 11:10 pm #

            And the Definition of a kiss is;
            ‘an application at headquarters, for a position at base’.
            I like that one.

            And a Mistress is ‘something that comes between a Mister and a mattress.’
            Not bad, either.

            Like

      • Hypocritophobe May 28, 2012 at 8:27 pm #

        I guess that means Derryn will be heading over here soon,to be enlightened.

        (PS JW If you are reading this can you check your blog Inbox-there’s a lengthy comment in the queue.Hate to see the WordPress mulcher grind it up!!!)

        Like

      • paul walter May 28, 2012 at 8:54 pm #

        What a pair. A god botherer and a bigot megaphone; Sylvania Waters writ large.
        Sound and fury signifying nothing, in the mean time attention is distracted from stories that do need to be told and never will be.
        Doug, your instinct about MS is correct.
        She’ll gladly take hours off for the mundane task of researching what has her interest at the time, which is good for us because she also possesses the rare capacity to decode and translate jargonese into comprehensible terms for normal people. And she’s not easily deterred. If her bullshit detector tells her she’ll find an answer in some obscure document she’ll spend years squeezing the info from the pen pushers when most of us would give up and walk away.
        Marilyn was consulted during the preparation of the powerful doco ABC, I think, had on asylum seekers. I’m sure her influence is demonstrated in the shattering epiphany that is the Mazar Ali story, that was central providing in providing a human reference point for Aussie viewers watching that doco and made it a fitting partner for the SBS doco, “Send Them Back Where They Belong”.

        Like

        • Hypocritophobe May 28, 2012 at 10:54 pm #

          “Sound and fury signifying nothing, in the mean time attention is distracted from stories that do need to be told and never will be.”

          You mean distracted from the profitable BACWAs non-agendas ?
          “White middle-class Anglo Saxon conservative voting/living Christians, and everything THEY find offensive,needing banning forthwith.”

          Surely there are no there are no causes greater of more urgent than theirs! There are women and girls in need of any assistance, who don’t fit the mould above?
          Nay!

          Like

          • paul walter May 29, 2012 at 4:11 am #

            Its sort of what my late mum, a foundation garment supervisor in a big store would say at home, after a busy day,although some her stuff was less complementary than yours..

            Like

      • hudsongodfrey May 29, 2012 at 10:08 am #

        I followed the link and took a gentle crack at her on her own blog. I was surprised it got posted but if she or some of her readers are persuaded to think about questioning their assumptions then I think its all for the best. I’ll be interested to see what emerges.

        Like

  31. Hypocritophobe May 28, 2012 at 10:40 pm #

    Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh Texas.

    The home state of Dubya.
    Take that you hard working student type!!

    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8474007/us-student-jailed-for-missing-school

    They wonder why US students crack.

    Like

  32. Hypocritophobe May 28, 2012 at 10:45 pm #

    Careful Mr Sharwood, MTR is sure to make this story all hers.

    http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/nine-cant-hackett-why-grant-hackett-still-has-a-job/story-e6frfmq9-1226369843458

    Petition time.

    Like

    • Matthew May 29, 2012 at 8:50 am #

      Hackett isn’t modelling Nena & Pasadena t-shirts or supporting the LFL, so he’s off the hook. MTR didn’t make one tweet or blog post about that incident, which is really odd as she supposedly is against domestic violence and this is a really high profile case. Instead she’s made about a dozen tweets about Barry Humphries making sexist comments about Gina Rinehart on last night’s Q&A (when has Humphries NOT been sexist?). Yep, she only tweets about the important stuff. Seriously doubt there will be any petition from Collective Whinge.

      Like

      • Hypocritophobe May 29, 2012 at 9:40 am #

        She has no time for Humphries,probably because he has joined scary Spice at Jenny Craig.Collective Shout et al are on the petition record there too,no?
        It would be a back-flip in front of her petitioning friends to cut him slack given the diet industry in her eyes needs banning too.
        Eventually no-one will answer her calls, so all her stories will be recycled or second hand.
        What am saying.They already are!

        Besides Dame Edna is infinitely better looking and more popular.
        I suspect a little professional jealousy perhaps?
        It could also be the usual,ideologically opposed views.

        Wow she’s teaming up with the other Twiggy!
        Fund-raising drive?

        Like

      • doug quixote May 30, 2012 at 6:13 am #

        Someone actually reads her tweets?

        Poor Matthew! The things we do for the nation.

        I thought Q and A was about the best it could be, and a genuinely funny session. The bacwa types just cannot see the forest for the trees.

        What else would we expect of them? Small minds with small tolerance and even smaller understanding.

        Like

        • Matthew May 30, 2012 at 7:16 am #

          Some of her material is particularly unintentionally funny though. There was a set of tweets about “severed hand” at a Canberra chemist (a quite fake looking prop left over from Halloween) which she was very upset about. It was comic gold. She tries so hard to show she has credibility as feminist and she does get it unbelievably wrong at times. Sometimes I wonder if she’s like a female Sacha Baron Cohen and the whole thing is a joke. Admittedly reading her tweet work is draining. I don’t know why her followers haven’t all toped themselves after being told over and over again that the world is going to hell in hand basket due the ‘orrible “pornification” of the planet.

          Like

        • AJ June 22, 2012 at 3:09 pm #

          Interesting emergence of “mummy porn” in the msm – wonder what the small minds think of that

          Like

          • Jennifer Wilson June 22, 2012 at 4:14 pm #

            What is mummy porn? You have to be a mother to make it/watch it?

            Like

            • Hypocritophobe June 22, 2012 at 5:06 pm #

              Sex with a dead Egyptian?

              I’m sure the term ‘yummy mummy’ raises blood pressure in several camps.

              Like

          • hudsongodfrey June 22, 2012 at 4:55 pm #

            For a minute there I thought it was all cold Ethyl and makin’ love by the refrigerator light.

            She means that Fifty Shades book.

            Like

  33. Online Casino - Super bonus March 21, 2013 at 6:03 pm #

    Your means of telling the whole thing in this paragraph is actually good,
    every one can simply understand it, Thanks a lot.

    Like

  34. how To April 27, 2013 at 9:24 am #

    What a material of un-ambiguity and preserveness of precious experience
    concerning unpredicted feelings.

    Like

  35. juice plus scam August 8, 2013 at 1:30 am #

    Hey there, I just want to give you a simple
    notice and help you recognize that a few illustrations or photos are not showing properly within this
    web blog. I am not sure the reasons why but I
    believe you’ll find it’s a linking complication.
    I tried this in 2 alternative browsers and both still present the same outcome.

    Like

  36. dailynews September 15, 2013 at 8:47 pm #

    I want to express thanks to the writer just for bailing me out
    of this scenario. After looking through the world wide web and getting advice that were
    not helpful, I was thinking my entire life was done. Existing devoid of the solutions to the problems you have fixed by way of your good article is a serious case, as well as the ones which might have adversely damaged my career if I hadn’t come across your
    website. That mastery and kindness in playing with all the pieces was priceless.
    I don’t know what I would have done if I had not come upon such a
    step like this. I am able to at this point look ahead to my future.
    Thanks for your time very much for this skilled and effective help.
    I will not hesitate to recommend your web site to anybody who
    should have support about this subject.

    Like

  37. personal injury lawyer jackson July 26, 2014 at 12:03 pm #

    Our expert personal injury lawyers specialize in vehicle accidents,
    wrongful death and other related cases. When you
    are looking for an attorney to represent you when you are injured, find one who will take your case on a contingency basis.
    After treatment, you lie in the hospital bed not knowing when you’ll be able to go home.

    Like

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Accidental nudity « No Place For Sheep « Secularity - May 27, 2012

    […] nudity « No Place For Sheep Accidental nudity « No Place For Sheep. Share […]

    Like

  2. The generational line | Sixth in Line - September 5, 2015

    […] football team coming to Australia to play football in their lingerie, in case there might be ‘accidental nudity’.  In case some part of their bodies in the rough and tumble of the game might show and men […]

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: