The author seems to know all about “men”, (although she is not one of them), and typically she says nothing positive about men, and typically she comes from a university, which are typically training students to think negatively of men also.

The idea that men vote for women based on their sex appeal is stupid beyond all comprehension. I think only a male hate feminist would think of such a thing.

I can’t think of any female politician that I find sexually appealing, yet I have voted for quite a few female politicians in the past, and I would think this would be the case with most other men also.

HRS,

You make the same old mistake that so many men (and women) make in debates about women’s issues – you think they are all about men. With such a male-centric view of women’s struggle for equality, it’s assumed that if women try to analyse the ways in which sexual politics impedes their progress, they (women) are both blaming their lot on men and expecting men to fix it.

This is not the case. All the huffing and puffing about man-hating feminism takes away from women their right to own their struggle for equality – something which has to be won by women; it will never, ever be ‘granted’ by men.

Having said that, I tend to agree with you that people – male or female – don’t vote for female politicians based on their sex appeal. I suspect it’s quite the opposite. However, this is precisely why the perennial focus on women’s sex appeal or lack thereof – without a corresponding focus on men’s – is a gender power game. It simultaneously empowers women (by lavishing attention on them) and disempowers them (by creating a sense of ongoing discomfort in being voyeuristically assessed). The end result is confusion – not just for women, but for society in general

Is it sex appeal or personality that is the issue. because for every example the article gives for a woman and the examples are brilliant Munroe was angel/whore; in Minogue it is child/woman; in Gillard it is strine/smart; and in McKew it is competence/charm it is easy to think of similar examples for men: Say Mohammed Ali as the boxer who floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee!

Is fame the result of our admiration of contrasts wwithin their identity!

Certainly our Max Factor will be a force to be reckoned with!.

Judianne

perhaps i should never, ever say that men and women are animals. we've been looking each other over several hundred thousand years now, and the 'pairing' process is so fundamental to racial survival that it may override intellectual considerations.

men don't hesitate to use strength and aggression to get what they want, and in a world where women can not use these tools, it seems fair, and is certainly traditional for them to use 'charm'. i just wish more 'charming' women would enter politics, but of course they just marry politicians, thus proving their charm is only skin deep.

in ms mckew's case, i hope she succeeds for whatever reason or none: just get rid of john howard anyway you can, ma'am, and many will be grateful.

MLK,
The author uses the word “men” in the generalised sense, so in the generalised sense I can also take offence to the article as I am a man. Find me a man who does vote for politicians based on their sex appeal.

I recently heard on the radio some feminist from a University saying that men in parliament look up women’s dresses. Really

I think male hate feminists are now scrapping the barrel in their attempt to find some dirt to throw at men

The British author does the men of UK a great disservice. With all due respects to Maggie, I don't think to many men voted for her looks. I am sure the ABC will be trying hard to get her girl home.

HRS, you forget Amanda Vanstone. Clearly an example of men voting based on her looks (I might not be serious about that).

There probably are men out there who vote based on looks when the opportunity arises but I am not aware of any who do so. On the other hand it's more likely that there will be journo's who will give favourable treatment to one of their own who presents well on camera.

If we were going to vote based on looks then the democrats would have done a lot better in recent elections than they have done.

The article seems to imply that the taboo's on trading on looks are a womans issue. Maybe not the intent but if so it's not obvious.

Someones kidding themselves if they think males get an easy run if they are obvious about trying to play up their looks (or sexual characteristics). Remember the ribbing the former Qld opposition leader got over shirt off shots. Find a male polly (or a male in an professional environment) who gets taken seriously if they make a habit of leaving the top few buttons of a shirt unbuttoned or of showing plenty of leg at work. Warrick Capper got away with tight shorts but most of us can't do so at work no matter how good our butts and legs.

The article is not about men but readers are better served if they remember that the issue is not one that applies only to women.

R0bert

Oh gawd, not another feminist beat-up. ..ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz

Judianne,
The example you give of Muhammad Ali conveys a sense of his personality but is devoid of any reference to his physical attractiveness or sexual desirability – on the contrary, it’s a pro-active description conveying power, agility and cunning … against other men. How different the gender power association might be if your example went something like:

‘The sexy ring dancer’s eyes ooze like liquid chocolate … as do his muscles …’?

R0bert,
‘Find a male polly (or a male in an professional environment) who gets taken seriously if they make a habit of leaving the top few buttons of a shirt unbuttoned or of showing plenty of leg at work.’

Exactly! And that’s the whole point. In the case of women, the habit automatically gets made FOR them – so that their ability to be taken seriously is automatically compromised. I don’t buy the fashionable gender-political rhetoric that whatever cultural negatives apply to women equally apply to men - particularly when it comes to the culture's over-sexualisation of women (and more recently, even little girls).

MLK
I don’t find Mohamed Ali sexy either. I would have to be converted into the religion of feminism and become a male hate feminist, and then I might find Mohamed Ali and politicians sexy. However I don’t think that is going to happen, or at least I hope it doesn't.

The sexualisation of children is a very serious problem in our society, but when was the last time did you find a father in a women’s clothes shop buying sexy little outfits for their daughters. And when was the last time did you see a father in a newsagency buying one of those disgusting teenage magazines for their daughters. It is the mother’s who are buying those items and propelling the sexualisation of children.

MLK, "I don’t buy the fashionable gender-political rhetoric " - I don't see it as fashionable rhetoric but rather as a loose reality. Most of these issues have a flip side and too often that is ignored. I suspect far to often with an intent to make women feel like victims of men.

I don't think we will ever get a broad based measure of the relative benefits and disadvantages men and women have experienced from the gender expectations society has placed on people. That's why I say a loose reality. The phrase "until you have walked a mile in my shoes" comes to mind.

I support men and women being free to explore non-traditional roles and to take on the responsibilities that go with those roles.

R0bert

HRS said: "I don’t find Mohamed Ali sexy either. I would have to be converted into the religion of feminism and become a male hate feminist, and then I might find Mohamed Ali and politicians sexy. However I don’t think that is going to happen, or at least I hope it doesn't."

This is such a wonderful example of completely and utterly missing the point, not to mention confused thinking and nonsensical reasoning. Did you read what MLK said at all before you wrote that HRS?

Hedgepig,

I don’t find Muhammad Ali “physically attractive” or “sexually desirable”, and personally I don’t know of any other men who do.

The idea that men vote for women based on their sexual appeal is total hogwash, but it is the type of nonsense that is so often said about the male gender by a feminist.

Maxine McKew may be just right for Liz Conor, and if McKew has any sex appeal undoing a button or two, or even showing a little ankle aint going to cut it for this porno star, Elle, GQ model, movie actor, actress, boy band inspired generation. I don't know his tastes but it might be a nice send off for Howard.

Posters like MLK who want to shine a light on the sexualising of the female while hiding behind her playgirl and reading the latest article in Ms. on the 10 best ways to arouse your teen lover all the while denying that women sexualise men in any equal form. Of course women never read those articles. Riiiight.

Here's a link speaking on female sexualisation of men and a book/movie review on subject.

http://www.trueu.org/dorms/womenshall/A000000490.cfm
http://www.tinynibbles.com/bookmovie.html