Most misogynist article I have ever seen

[BelleCurve]

A woman gets criticised for looking perfectly normal

www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/3573312/A-mums-honest-take-on-her-body.html

also 9 and half stone is not half a stone overweight, it is ideal BMI.

[LRDTheFeministDragon]

I'm just confused as to why she wrote it ... it's very sad for her that she feels like this but why on earth write about it?

[StealthPolarBear]

at the comment: "she looks lovely considering she has a son"

[AliceWorld]

What the fuck is the point of that article? I mean I know what the point is through a feminist lens, but outside of that

[DirtyMartini]

That is just so sad. And yeah, what is her supposed reason for saying it all? Seems entirely random.

[AliceWorld]

It's the Sun's reason for thinking this is an article I question more. I can see why she'd say it, I imagine it's not unusual, but how did the Sun's editor work it out in his head it was the article that was missing from the world. Maybe they do actually sit round and wonder what they can do to make the uppity women feel more shit. Hopefully a tipping point will come where it actually makes them more uppity

[LRDTheFeministDragon]

Nah, it's great for the Sun ... nearly-naked woman with big boobs (check!), complaining she's ugly and buying into all that crap (check!), lots of potential for readers to make knee-jerk judgments (check!).

[DirtyMartini]

Not her real reason for having these thoughts/saying this sort of thing by "her supposed reason" I meant the public-facing justification for the piece whether or not that comes from her or from the editorial board. What we are "supposed to" believe is her reason. What is that? That it's brave and needs to be said? That it is a necessary or helpful thing somehow, to read all about a woman's hate for her body?

Maybe it says somewhere, if I missed it, apologies, I sort of couldn't bear to read it really closely.

I don't find the Sun's actual reasoning for printing it much of a mystery, tbh

[AliceWorld]

Exactly what I thought DM - you worded it way better.

It didn't say. I looked for it. It was just a series of self criticisms

[BelleCurve]

I couldn't even work out how they justify this as an article. I suppose we should just be grateful that she was wearing underwear, compared to most.

I suppose what gets to me is that this also feeds the whole "women, judging each other", "worst enemies" kind of thing as well as an excuse to print a picture of a nearly naked woman.

But how is this considered newsworthy, even by their own very loose definition of the word?

[BelleCurve]

I am also at DH, for buying the Sun in the first place, but that is an ongoing battle and he does have other redeeming features.

But, his comment was "why is this sexist, it is the woman saying it herself" so much work still to do!

[DirtyMartini]

In the few moments I was skimming it earlier, I had about three or four really negative thoughts about my own body, because although I am really trying not to think that way, unfortunately I still sometimes do. And the way the article is presented seems designed to make anyone with a bit of body insecurity, in spite of themselves, think "I know what she means, I hate my breasts/belly/whatever too". Which the Sun would probably say is a good thing because it means it's relatable, right?

And for a lot of people, even though we don't want to identify with it and actively try not to let it do its nasty work on us, we will feel that sense of recognition/nodding along as an almost automatic response before we pull ourselves up and remind ourselves that it's bullshit. Even thinking it for a fleeting second is no fun. I wish I was strong enough to ward this reaction off. I intend to get there one of these days.

So reading the article = feeling like shit for lots of women; more so for someone who isn't sort of braced for it by clicking through from the MN feminism boards, but is just idly flicking through the paper.

Also: it's pathetic and annoying, but at the same time kind of a handy confirmation of our assessment of this crap, that they couldn't even be bothered to think up a token justification for it.

[AyeRobot]

Ugh.

DM, I agree wholeheartedly. I also think that articles like this one also invite comparisons between the woman who is reading and the woman about whom the article is written i.e. where am I in relation to her. I am not yet feministically evolved to swerve those thoughts, although I am enough not to pay them any heed, in the main. This article is very different to the one about post-pregnancy bodies based on that blog that I'm sure someone else can remember the address for. That is about eliminating shame, the Sun one is about encouraging it.

I have a half-formed thought about the media encouraging narcissism, primarily in women, in terms of looks after reading a few threads on here. If it is true, then it would be a useful distraction tool, as well as fuelling the needs that are the goal of marketing bods.

[tribpot]

"And I've noticed even female athletes have a bit of jelly-bum going on - and they're mega fit."

Oh. My. God. Cancel the female events at the Olympics, how very dare they?