-
Breasts = sexual exploitation is a dangerous simplification. There’s an essay.
-
A well written piece Stilg as usual it is your sharp wit and honesty that shines through.
-
Granted, probably a bit too much robust debate over a clay Gnome and wider far more serious issues of women in appalling abusive situations, but we are just getting into social media. Time and place and all that, bear with us, I am sure the real news on women’s rights in Africa will emerge.
-
Wow, well written. And I have to agree with your reasoning.
My initial reaction to the gnome issue was to leave her behind or cover her up for fear of possibly causing offence (to the people, especially the women of Tanzania). I did a lot of thinking after reading the ongoing comments & arguments. Did a bit of light reading on Tanzania, ActionAid & other aid organisations working in Africa. Reflected on things I did (and why) to rebel against living in a nearby ultra conservative, Muslim country that often suppressed or ignored women and/or sexuality. In amongst the good, I saw events that were incredibly cruel and made me realize that equality (for women, gays or even other nationalities) did not yet exist. It is such a complex issue, it’s not black & white, it’s many shades of grey. I think the only right answer is to be true to oneself.
-
The least well-developed part of your thesis, Sir, is a justification for why ‘Pong had to pay $3.50 for a garden gnome at a $2 shop. But otherwise brilliant. Thank you.
-
Pingback from Independence is half naked : Zombie Plan on 27 May 2009 at 10:23 pm
-
Stilgherrian,
it appears that mwandani is possibly an Australian based blogger so would (I think) falling into the “Australian audience” category .
Reference:
J. Nambiza Tungura
http://globalvoicesonline.org/author/nambiza/
“Nambiza Tungaraza is Adelaide-based Swahili blogger, radio presenter, community worker and an artist. In Radio he presents the AFROWORLD program at 101.5fm Radio Adelaide and coordinates/mentor young broadcasters. As an artist (painter and computer graphics designer), he has done exhibitions in Asia, Europe and in Australia. He still paints occasionally. Nambiza also works in various refugees-related projects.”
BTW: There appears to be a surplus of naked gnomes in the inner Western Suburbs of Sydney (25 cases on order – Adelaide according to Google News) so it could be that Pong was short changed. It appears they have been distributed as prizes in a local Bingo competition and this has been the situation for at least two years.
-
I’m not a wowser — but I’m sure my Grandma would be pretty happy with my use of the word.
I don’t agree that banning cheerleaders will stop aggressive sexual behaviour by football players but I do believe that objectification of women (even cartoon or plaster gnomes!) does contribute to degrading attitudes towards women.
Media and images DO influence our behaviour and levels of normalcy or acceptability. Have you ever walked out of the ‘Clockwork Orange’ and wanted to punch someone who bumped into you? I have.
We need to be aware of how seemingly innocuous props can indirectly or subconsciously say that ‘It is OK’. And often it is not. Or, at least, should not be.
That said — Stil, you have a good argument and it is very well articulated.
I like that the discussion has had due weight. Those from ActionAid should not be dismayed — their arguments, while perhaps not as well crafted as yours, do remind us of the ongoing issues faced by women around the world. These issues should continue to be brought to the attention of all of us. Debate, after all, is critical in order to achieve change.
-
As I said in my original post I’m ambivalent about the topless gnome. I’m not personally offended by it, but I can see that some people might well be. I’m relieved that she’s not actually going to Africa, where I suspect the potential for offense might well be greater, although that’s a guess on my part.
It’s hard to tell, but from the names and icons on the comments, it does seem as though the majority of commenters in support of retaining the topless gnome are male. I think that’s significant.
I don’t buy into a simplistic bare breasts = rape argument, but I do believe that there is a causal link between the objectification of women and violence against women. And I’d make the point that when you’re on the side with the power it’s very difficult to see and acknowledge what it might be like to on the side without the power. It’s very easy to say ‘this isn’t offensive because I’m not offended by it’, when the reality is that you’re not the person the offense is aimed at. The case that illustrates that is the “Nigger Brown” football stadium furore. For the white people behind the naming of the stadium to say ‘It’s not offensive, it’s just the bloke’s nickname’ ignores the fact that a number of indigenous people were offended by a word that’s generally meant to be offensive, regardless of the context. For them, the decision to use that term stood as a statement of intent: ‘We don’t care whether you’re offended or not, we have the power and you don’t”.
Since I know you personally, Stil, I know that you don’t have the attitudes towards women that the ownership of a topless female figurine might imply, but I suspect that displaying it may well misrepresent you in certain fora. I support your freedom to display it, but not necessarily your choice to do so.
Also, as I said in my original post, the whole issue with bare breasted women is about choice, and that choice generally takes place in a culturally and legally proscribed context. As a theoretically emancipated Western woman, I theoretically have choices about my body and about displaying it. In practice those choices are quite limited. I can choose to bear my breasts on Bondi Beach or on certain kinds of social occasions (although if I chose to do so at my local shopping mall, I suspect I’d get arrested), but the reality is that I don’t because I would find the attention very unwelcome and the situation would feel, if not be, dangerous. To me that suggests that even in a society where the rhetoric suggests that I’m equal, the reality is otherwise.
The garden gnome is indeed a representation, not a woman forced into pornographic display, but representations are after all symbols, and the interpretation of those symbols is at the discretion of the person doing the interpreting. Or to put it more bluntly: it’s your right to display the gnome, but don’t be surprised if some people are offended.
-
@stilgherrian “I’m told there’s a shop in Surry Hills which still has plenty of the gnomes in stock. Some are topless, some have bikini tops.”
Downunder Discounts Foveaux Street Surry Hills $4.95 for a bikini clad gnome with a face simliar to Gnaomi. They do not currently stock naked gnomes.
I was merely passing on my way back from a presentation on the National Broadband Network given by a member of the Expert Panel who advised the government that this was/is the route to travel.
And Yes. I purchased a gnome. I photographed them on display and it seemed approriate in the circumstances.
-
I still don’t understand how Gnaomi can be said to be “objectifying women.”
Does a regular garden gnome somehow “objectify” old men fishing? No? What if we give him a whimsical name, like “Gnorm.” No? Still not objectified? No.
Silliness.
-
Pingback from Independence is half naked : ZombieSkittles on 14 August 2009 at 4:17 pm
-
Never seen your site, or heard of you…. but you have made a GREAT Point. Cheers!
-
Pingback from Project TOTO and Africa | Aide-Memoire on 15 April 2012 at 11:58 pm









ABC The Drum
Crikey
CSO Online
Delicious (dormant)
Dopplr
Flickr
LinkedIn (dormant)
newmatilda.com
Posterous (deceased)
Qik (dormant)
Stilgherrian Live (Ustream)
Technology Spectator
The Full Tilt & Patch Monday
Twitter
Viddler
28 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://stilgherrian.com/toto/look-about-that-damn-topless-gnome/trackback/