Some great posts! Pelican and Bronwyn, great comments.

When I referred to privileges that men take for granted I'm squarely in modern times. Not 200 years ago. Not only men's lives were hard then. Women's lives where also appalling.

I'm simply referring to being able to get a loan from a bank on your own merit, moving from nurses quarters without having to obtain permission from your father, staying in the work force after marriage, having custody granted of children in the event of divorce, just to name only a few issues that improved for women in the last 40 years.

It wasn't that long ago that a women, regardless of qualifications could no longer work in a government position after marriage. A man's marital status was irrelevant.

It wasn't that long ago that a man could make any kind of financial commitment without his wife knowing, but his wife could only do so with his permission. Regardless of her own personal financial status.

It was not that long ago that custody of children automatically went to the father unless he decreed otherwise. A woman leaving her husband lost her children, except if the father of her children agreed otherwise.

In regards to the ad. I personally am extremely doubtful that an ad could encourage anybody to violence.

Censorship in a free and open society I find even more disturbing than any ad.

I'd like to get away from the whole gender issue in this instance actually and consider the subject of our casual portrayal of violence and acceptance thereof. Not that this causes a person to commit violence, but are we becoming accepting of violence?

If it is make belief is portrayal of violence than always OK?

I have some difficulty with this. I'm not that terribly young anymore and I've found life not to be that black and white and clear cut always. This ad made me feel uncomfortable and I'm very open to examine why. After all, this is only an ad for shoes, not drink driving say.

Weighing in to the debate about feminism...

I am a feminist. However, it’s a matter of indifference to me whether men/women are happier, better, nicer than women/men.

I get irritated by the incessant portrayal of women as victims, in some kind of misguided attempt to appeal to men to improve their (women’s) lot.

Likewise, I’m perplexed at the constant attempts by men here to portray themselves as victims, in some misguided appeal to women to forget about rape, domestic violence and gender salary gaps.

I am also baffled by men's stubborn lack of awareness that the forces that guide their lives are controlled, not by women, but by rich, powerful men who view them (men) as expendable.

All this OLO rhetoric about how 'If we are all nice to one another, men and women will find some common ground for communication’ generates a sense of self-righteousness, but little else.

In the gender threads I have seen, there is an unwillingness or inability on the part of most commenters to step back and look at the wider sociological picture. There has been a system in place for at least 5000 years (according to most archaeological research), in which:
• rich men dominate poor men
• men dominate women
• adults dominate children
• people dominate nature.

Before that – and this applies to about 98 per cent of human evolution – people lived in societies in which wealth, privilege and work were fairly evenly distributed across men, women and children. And animals and nature were not viewed as something to be tamed.

It’s unlikely that we can retrieve those times again, but we could at least learn something from them.

I’m not sure what this has to do with an ad depicting a female corpse in a car boot and wearing sexy boots, but I’m approaching my word limit, so I might leave that to another post.

Yvonne,

Yawn. Heard it all before a million times, well AFTER these injustices have been corrected. So why the need to constantly whinge on about the old days, when all this stuff happened before I was born? This is the chip on the shoulder I'm talking about, and it's held by many a woman born in my generation with the same opportunities as myself. It's ridiculous.

SJF,

Patronising much?

SJF. I'm desperately trying to not to get involved, but that was beautifully said, and not in the least patronising.Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

I'd love to hear your take on the ad, if it so pleased you to give it.

Good point Whitty (about feeling on a equal footing with your female contemporaries).

Vanilla

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Exactly what came to my mind when I read Whitty's post!

"Good point Whitty (about feeling on a equal footing with your female contemporaries)."

I presume you are referring to Whitty's last post. If so you are being very generous! Especially considering he'd just written off Yvonne's very well considered comments as a yawn! I like the way you always find the good. Pity it's not always reciprocated! But hopefully your fine example will gradually be reflected in all of our posts!

For those of you with daughters in the early teens, you may be interested if you haven't heard of it already in a magazine I heard featured on R.N.'s Life Matters this morning called Indigo. Its tagline is Give Girls a Voice.

It's intended as an antidote to teen mags like Dolly and features realistic looking girls rather than airbrushed twigs. There's an emphasis on girls being girls and enjoying their girlhood rather than being rushed into adulthood before they are ready. There's a wide range of topics and things girls can be involved in rather than the superficial focus on celebrity and looking good which dominates most teen mags.

There's a strong advertising code so that only ads reflecting the editorial policy will be included. It's directed at a diverse range of focus groups and, judging by the girls being interviewed, is being really well received by the target age group. It's quarterly at this stage but planning to move to monthly editions eventually. It's up to its third edition and its readership is already expanding rapidly, most of it by subscription.

So there are some good things happening out there. My girl's well past this but if you've got girls in this age group you might like to support it. I'll certainly be giving it a plug whenever the opportunity arises.

SJF

'Before that – and this applies to about 98 per cent of human evolution – people lived in societies in which wealth, privilege and work were fairly evenly distributed across men, women and children. And animals and nature were not viewed as something to be tamed.'
Dream on!