When "Girl Power" fails...

In my world literature course last semester, we read short stories from around the globe (as the name would imply!). One Japanese story, Late Chrysanthemum ("Bangiku") by Hayashi Fumiko, was a particularly interesting take on femininity. It was also nice to get a different culture's perspective for a change.

Late Chrysanthemum tells the story of a well-to-do geisha in her mid-50's, Kin. There is a general western misconception that geishas are like Japanese prostitutes. This is not true. They are trained singers, musicians, conversationalists and entertainers in general. While they provide company for men, true geishas don't engage in anything sexual with their clients. That said, Kin was a strong woman in her own right. She dabbled in real estate and was a money-lender. She supported herself financially, choosing not to depend on a man. In fact, she almost had a contempt for men, refusing to provide meals to her male visitor in the story, Tabe. "Domesticity had no appeal for her." At this point in the story, I applauded Kin's willingness to break gender norms.

Unfortunately, as the paragraph went on, my liking for Kin took a major nosedive. She revealed that "nothing held less charm" than a man with no money. No wonder she wouldn't give a meal to Tabe, "in the hope of winning his heart with her cooking." He had no money, and therefore, nothing that interested her. This notion, along with her extreme obsession with her looks, really made me resent her character. While, yes, she admittedly was an autonomous woman, she'd also play her expected feminine roles, when it was beneficial to her. She was a hypocrite.

What really shocked me was that during the class discussion of this story, only one other person (a girl) agreed that Kin was a morally repugnant. The others found her to be some poster child of "Girl Power." If gold-digging geishas are your idea of new femininity, then be my guest...

(Extra Credit 2) "Hilarious social commentary", or homophobic-meathead-tough-guy's rant?

So, I'm watching Comedy Central and a commercial comes on. It's advertising some stand-up comedian named Sebastian Maniscalco. The video below will give you a taste of his "humor."



Unfortunately, I could not find a link to the commercial I saw. In it, though, he talks about men in bars these days, saying:

“Go look at what they’re ordering to drink. Apple martinis? You’re 35 years old; you’re walking around with a green drink, a little apple floating on top. You go get a beer or something that tastes like gasoline...”

So to Mr. Maniscalco, alcoholic drinks do define us. Obviously, he sees apple martinis as something feminine and, thus, an undesirable drink to a man. In order to be masculine enough, the drink has to taste like "gasoline," as he says. What I get from this, is that "masculine" men are stupid. They'll do anything that tests their toughness. You think natural selection would have eliminated these "irrational" beings by now.

I'm sorry for laying on the sarcasm so thick, but people with this kind of macho mindset (especially stand-up comedians who have an entire audience roaring with laughter) really annoy me. I swear, if men aren't outwardly projecting MANLINESS, they're automatically deemed feminine by these types of people. Sorry, let me break out my 32. oz bleeding steak, my can of frothy Budweiser and a football, so I can show you how manly I am. Kidding of course. I don't care that much. What is so ironic to me is that, even though Sebastian is so ready to make fun of "wimpy" guys, he looks pretty metrosexual himself, with the gelled, spiked hair and well-manicured appearance.

(Extra Credit 1) Musings on Roller Derby

Sex sells. It’s pretty much a concrete fact at this point. It’s in film, on television, and even here at Old Dominion University. While ODU may not be sponsoring the event directly (maybe they are, I don’t know), it is still advertising it with flyers. The picture below shows one such flyer I found in the BAL building.



Obviously the picture caught my eye and prompted me to write this blog. What is it about this type of image that attracts peoples attention?
One look at the sensual pose and lack of clothes should answer the question. But let's think about this. Does it imply that Roller Derby is actually really boring, to the point that it needs to have scantily-clad girls to attract an audience? I've only seen clips of Roller Derby (or "Roller Jam") on TV before, but it seems like a fairly exciting sport. Its fast-pace makes it seem more appealing than other popular spectator-sports like golf. So why did the makers of this poster (as well as those who decided that the competitors would wear such skimpy uniforms) feel the need to take it step further by making the sport all about sex? What happened to "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?" I guess it boils down to: Roller Derby sells, but sexy Roller Derby sells better. It's just one of those ugly truths that we, as a consumerist society, have to accept.

Another take on this poster and the sport as a whole is that they may even be marketing violence towards women! This may sound like a stretch, but we've already established that the hunched-over girl is a selling point. Just look at the picture. What happens when we add bruises and bandages to the mix? This sport has elbowing, shoving, and sometimes legitimate fighting. I don't think it would attract much of a female audience (how sexist of me!), so the audience would be primarily men. With all that, is Roller Derby really just a practical and legal outlet for misogynists? The scary thing is, yes, maybe it is.

10) What Women Want (in a Video Game)

“Since more women play video games than in years past, it's only natural for guys to give them to their female love interest. Some gift games, however, could get you punched in the face by sending the wrong message. When buying games for your girlfriend, make sure you avoid these potential disasters.”

Last week, a headline, by the name “Don’t Buy These Games for Your Girlfriend,” caught my eye. I always love reading the cheesy countdown lists, provided by AOL or AIM, that are usually based on almost nothing. But this one is more than pertinent with its overwhelming amount of gender stereotypes.

According to the list, men should NOT buy the following “potential disasters” for their girlfriends:
-Weight Loss Games (ex: Wii Fit)
-Brainy/ Educational Games (ex: Brain Age)
-Cooking Games
-“Imagine” Games
-Violent Games(ex: Grand Theft Auto, Mad World)
-“Just ones she hates”
-Erotic Games
-Sports Games

The only ones I can truly understand are “just ones she hates,” “Imagine” games and erotic games. Why would anyone buy a gift for their girlfriend that they would hate? The “Imagine” series is obvious, since it’s primarily for small children (I shudder to think anyone has a girlfriend that is a little girl) and erotic games just seem inappropriate to buy for anyone. If you are into that, then buy it and keep it to yourself.

As far as weight loss, educational, and cooking games, I find the reasoning really silly. The list claims that a woman will think her boyfriend is calling her fat with an exercise game, stupid with a “brainy” game, or her cooking bad with a cooking game. Maybe this reveals something about women in American society, though. Do women really take any kind of gift as an attack on them? If I give jewelry to a woman, will she misconstrue that I’m saying she is poor? I wouldn't be mad if someone bought me Brain Age. So what is it that is different in women’s minds that make them react in such an accusatory manner?

The sports and violent games make the least sense to me, though. What a glaring generalization, that women don’t like sports. Plus, it does not seem very fair to simply say that women don’t “like” violence. Plenty of women enjoy scary/ gory films. Or are the creators of the list really implying that men do like violence?

While it is definitely filled to the brim with stereotypes, it makes me wonder: what were the people who made this list basing their assertions on? Generalizations have to come from somewhere. Maybe the way women respond to certain gifts is an implication that they are more self-conscious than men. But it leads me to another question, what is so unique to women that makes them more self-conscious than men (generally speaking, of course)? Are lists like these, perhaps, perpetuating stereotypes? Are they programming women to think that a gift has some negative signal behind it?

The part on sports and violent games also made me ask myself, why are sports and violence automatically considered masculine interests? I suppose the "aggressive" quality usually tied to masculinity played a part in creating those stereotypes. In reality, most women (and men) are more complex than this article would have you believe, and their likes and dislikes are not really so easily categorized.

9) We wear each others pants in this relationship

Sure, men and women both wear pants, but the fits are completely different. Men’s pants are generally more formless and baggy, while women’s pants usually accentuate curves. Although under these generalities, clothing companies have further compartmentalized, to appeal to a wider range of consumer niches. On the Levi website alone, men can get “relaxed,” “slim,” and “bootcut” jeans. Women can get “flare,” “skinny,” and “low-rise” jeans, among others.

Nowadays, however, clothes long-established for one specific gender are being “made available” to the other. For instance, males within certain music subcultures are known to wear “girl pants.” Girls are now also being marketed to, with “boyfriend jeans.” What does this say about our societal norms for clothing? We expect men to wear their “own” clothes and women to wear their “own” clothes. But when they do go outside of these norms, it’s somehow special enough to get its own label.

This really just further proves how arbitrary the conventions of femininity and masculinity really are. If you can be feminine just from wearing girl pants, or masculine from boyfriend pants, isn’t the whole thing a charade? If you stripped away all the feminine skirts, the masculine cologne, and the now-androgynous girl and boyfriend pants, what would you have? Are these people really inherently masculine or feminine, or does it mostly stem from material possessions? What it all comes down to, in the minds of those buying the clothes, is “who do I want to be today?” Though it seems like it may be blurring the lines between the genders, fashion has just become another way to perpetuate gender stereotypes, by marketing femininity and masculinity.

8) Here's to You, Mrs. Robinson

"And here's to you, Mrs. Robinson,
Jesus loves you more than you will know
God bless you please, Mrs. Robinson
Heaven holds a place for those who pray"

We all know the song by Simon & Garfunkel. It turns out this song was actually made for a film classic from the 1960's called The Graduate. Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft) is a middle-aged woman who tries to seduce her neighbor's son, college graduate Benjamin (Dustin Hoffman). She makes him drive her home. Then he must come into the house with her because she doesn't like to be alone. Then he must go upstairs and unzip her dress because she can't reach. You get the idea. Benjamin was pretty shy guy and was very hesitant to do any of the things she wanted. At the end of the night, nothing happens and Benjamin leaves, feeling very confused about what has just happened.

Some time later, however, Benjamin gives Mrs. Robinson a call. They go to a hotel and begin their summer fling. After a couple months, things aren't going the way Mrs. Robinson plans and she threatens Benjamin. He moves on with his life and Mrs. Robinson tells everyone that he raped her. No one questions what she may have actually done and Benjamin is automatically deemed "filth."

Is this situation representative of a larger trend in modern society? In any situation in which a man and a woman come to blows, no matter their relationship, isn't it true that there often tends to be a certain bias against the man? Can it so easily be assumed that under any circumstances, the man is more likely at fault? Mrs. Robinson is the one who assertively initiated the situation. She is the one who put even the idea of an affair in Benjamin's mind. Yet, she is infallible. If she says she was raped, then she undoubtedly was. Forget the fact that Benjamin was an honors student and a virgin. If she says it, it happened. I cannot imagine the kind of trouble Mr. Robinson would get in if he fooled around with a younger woman...

7) Deputy Punches Girl on Video.

The headline reads, “Deputy Punches Girl on Video.” This incident was revealed through a released surveillance video, in which a 15-year-old girl is put into a holding cell. As the deputy walks out, she kicks off one of her shoes at him. At this, the male deputy loses control, first slamming her against a wall, then pulling her to the ground by her hair and punching her repeatedly while she’s pinned down.

This was undoubtedly an extreme overreaction and the man really deserves whatever charges are placed against him. Though, I cannot help but wonder if this story was given such media attention (enough to be on AOL’s front page) because it depicted a male suppressing a female. Would this even have been brought to anyone’s attention if the victim were another male? What if a female deputy had done the same to a male or female victim? I think that in such a case, the deputy would be seen as defending herself. It seems that, for some reason, our brains are programmed to react much more strongly to a man harming another woman, than a man harming another man, or a woman harming anyone. Then again, there’s that unwritten rule that men don’t hit women.

This brings a recent event to mind. About three weeks ago, R&B superstar Chris Brown allegedly beat his also famous girlfriend Rihanna, to the point where she had heavy facial bruising, a split lip, bite marks, and swelling. She has rightfully received plenty of sympathy, because no one deserves that. But I wonder if, hypothetically, Rihanna had attacked Chris, who according to the “no hitting girls” golden rule did nothing, would he get any sympathy? Think about it, a woman beats up a man. There is no way he’d get any kind of consolation from the public. He would be endlessly ridiculed and laughed at because it’s “shameful” for a man to be overpowered physically by a women. Then why is no one laughing about Rihanna's situation? Once again, there are double standards and gender stereotypes involved with even something like this.

6) Is Japan saying Men ≠ Women? はい、そですね。

Have you ever seen the show on ABC called Wipeout? It was absolutely inspired by the extremely entertaining and dangerous phenomenon known as Japanese game shows. They usually consist of eager contestants making their ways across ridiculous obstacle courses. The G4 channel broadcasts one such show called Ninja Warrior (known in Japan as SASUKE). Every year, one hundred people gather at Mt. Midoriyama to compete in a single-elimination challenge over four grueling stages, testing strength and stamina. The contenders climb walls, swing across gaps, and shimmy along ledges among other things. Because of the demanding physical nature, a majority of the participants are buff men. Women are allowed to participate but very few actually have.

There is also a spinoff of the show called Women of Ninja Warrior (known in Japan as KUNOICHI). As the title implies, only woman are allowed to compete. With such a gender restriction, the makers of the show decided to use the obstacles to test balance and speed. The difference in gender is acknowledged. The shows cater to the apparent strengths of each gender. While I’m sure some men could do the female challenges, they are most likely more suited for those in the original Ninja Warrior.

Maybe this shows that Asia (or at least Japan) has made a pretty clear distinction between what men and women are better at. This discrepancy is evident in America. We tend to claim the genders are equal. However, just look at a high school gym class. Men are expected to run a mile in about eight minutes while women are given ten to eleven minutes. On the other hand, women are expected to be more flexible than men. Is the modern idea of “gender equality” just a ruse for political correctness while the differential treatment of the sexes still exists and will continue to? Japan seems to have made their peace with the idea; maybe it's time America does the same.

Ninja Warrior AKA Strength and Stamina

Women of Ninja Warrior AKA Balance and Speed

5) In hot pursuit of... a woman?

Last week, I saw the beginning of the celebrity gossip/ news show, Chelsea Lately. The host started off with a bit, spoofing an apparent news story in which a woman stole a U-Haul van and was driving madly down the highway. It was really funny, but one line stood out to me. The woman narrating the action, presumably a news correspondent, said, “It is so unusual to see a female in a pursuit like this.”

Let’s take a minute and think about what she just said. Is she implying that it is “normal” to have a male in a high speed pursuit? Probably not. So what is so different about men and women when they get behind the steering wheel? I don’t really know. What I do know, however, is that there are plenty of stereotypes involving women, men, and driving.

As I pulled into the Best Buy parking lot the other day, I noticed a bumper sticker on a car saying, “You’ve just been passed by a woman.” I didn’t really understand the point of it at first. But thinking back on it, there’s definitely a stereotype that woman are worse drivers than men. I would’ve never come to that conclusion since I think most people in general are pretty poor at driving. This bumper sticker would lead you to believe, though, that there is some sort of shame involved with being passed by a woman on the highway, if you are a man. Do some men really take driving so seriously, that it is like a competition? And is it especially disgraceful that a woman “beat” you in driving? Just the fact that such a bumper sticker exists would mean the answer is yes. I guess men are still just the alpha-males we’ve always known them to be, while women are still the inferior gender. As silly as it is for the sticker to have any bearing on real life, it’s a bit ironic that a woman would put it on her car. It is basically like surrendering to the stereotype and just perpetuating it.


Chelsea Lately clip (Warning! Some PG-13ish language)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JylyfoELo0

4) What in tarnation are them dern kids watchin' these days?!

Living at home with a younger sister, I’m definitely exposed to more than my fill of Disney Channel, Cartoon Network, and Nickelodeon. But after sorting through all the high-pitched voices, petty teen drama, and horrible over-acting, I saw that even television shows aimed toward children are laden with ideas of what is feminine and masculine.


Total Drama Island is a cartoon series mocking reality TV shows. Contestants do challenges each week in the hope of attaining the grand prize. The first thing you notice in this show is the exaggerated appearance of the characters. ALL the women, despite their weights, have enormous breasts and hips. Plus, about 3 or 4 of the women are scantily clad, wearing only booty shorts and a skimpy top. Most of the men also have extremely chiseled looks, with defined chins and large upper body muscles. I’ve never sat through an episode, but I’m sure the dialogue is just as irritatingly stilted (which Cartoon Network rates TV-PG for being “mildly flirtatious”).


Drake and Josh is one of Nickelodeon’s staples. It is a live-action series about two boys who become stepbrothers and the hilarity that ensues. As much as I actually enjoy this one, it is pretty awful if looked at from a feminist standpoint. Drake is basically, a man whore. The only thing he cares about is women. He is often found randomly making out with a girl he’s met just minutes before. It is made worse by the fact that the women do not protest. They are completely satisfied with being made Drake’s object. Why? Because he’s so hot and such a good kisser! Whenever the noticeably “uncooler” brother, Josh, says anything contrary to Drake, he is immediately shut down. What kind of message is this sending to impressionable young girls AND boys?


iCarly is a series about a girl and her friends with a popular internet web-show. As much as Drake and Josh shows single-minded men, iCarly shows that girls are just shallow. For instance, in one episode, the main character has a crush on an older guy who is a musician. Carly invites him onto her show to sing live. When she finds out he is a terrible singer, she does not find him attractive anymore. Fortunately, her geeky tech friend alters the singing voice, saving her show (phew, I was worried there for a second). Carly’s older brother and guardian (in his late-20’s probably) also shows some shallow qualities. He usually plays the quirky funny character, but occasionally he’ll slip into slimeball mode. A girl scout needs to sell more cookies and Spencer immediately helps out because the mom is “hot.” Carly even asks why he’s helping a little girl. He says bluntly, “Hot mom,” and Carly just accepts it as normal. Personally, I found it kind of creepy.


From what I’ve seen on children’s television, it’s a miracle we come out with any sense of morality (not that “adult shows” promote anything better). If girls learn to be feminine from their favorite shows, they gather that showing skin and wearing cool clothes get the guys’ attention. Boys learn that masculinity is about treating women as something less than them, and both genders will assume appearances mean everything. These channels are subconsciously influencing kid’s brains right from the beginning. The big corporations ought to put their influence on children’s minds to better use. Right now, they’re really encouraging them act in ways that are not appropriate for their age. I find the predominant depictions of teens as loose, suggestive, and morally deficit to be pretty disconcerting. This repeated portrayal of provocative themes may be contributing to skewed sexual attitudes among America's youth.

3) Dance like a boy. Now a girl. Oh wait, no homo!

So last week I watched an episode of America’s Best Dance Crew (ABDC, for short). The theme of the night was Brittany Spears. Each “crew” had to adapt certain dance moves and moments from her popular music videos into their own respective dance routines. I’m going to focus on the dances of three crews which best exemplified ideas of masculinity or femininity.


The first group, Beat Freaks, was an all-girl group. They breakdance and do other dancing which is usually attributed to males. For the challenge, six of the girls dressed in suits, as “men,” while the other one dressed as Brittany herself. While in the suits, they were quite convincing as males; the female judge Lil Mama even commented, “When you were dancing as men, I felt like I was watching men.” Half way through the dance, the suited ladies stripped off their jackets, transforming to women. The one who was Brittany, however, was feminine the entire time. She had a seductive glare and a walk that exaggerated hip movement. Before the dance, the girls had expressed their reservations about being too sexy. But their dance showed that a female group can dance manly or womanly (or at least what is socially accepted as manly or womanly).

The second group to perform was an all-male team called Strikers All Stars. They pumped their fists and flexed their muscles throughout the routine. To accentuate this, they wore sleeveless shirts (that my sister described as “Chippendale-y”). So this group, as men, capitalized on their masculinity. Judge JC Chassez even said, “You’re playing to your attributes… And it works. You’re letting [the audience] know that you’re powerful.”

Another all-male group, Quest Crew, took the dancing in a different direction. One member said beforehand, “The dancing will be a lot less masculine than we’re used to. Hopefully, it will give America a side of us they haven’t seen before.” About half of the routine was danced with what Shane Sparks (a famous hip-hop choreographer) called a “feminine vibe,” as an homage to Brittany. He claimed they aced that section, but he felt the need to justify himself, by saying “no homo.” He must have felt that complimenting another male in any way, somehow compromised his own masculinity. Lil Mama obviously didn’t feel this way as she praised the female Beat Freaks without hesitation.

So basically in one episode of ABDC, you’ll see that there are many feminine and masculine ideals abound. You’ve both genders dancing in ways that they perceive as feminine or masculine. We also saw that due to social norms, males cannot (or don’t) express themselves as freely about other men, as women do about other women. In addition, it seems that most of the other co-ed groups dance in a more androgynous manner. There’s not really the feminine or masculine exaggeration as seen in the single gender groups. It’s strange to think that an activity can be so gender-exclusive. Can other activities like sports or playing instruments be done in such a way that others would be able to identify it as masculine or feminine? How about eating or reading? I know those last two sound ridiculous, but where do we draw the line? These are the questions that haunt me… Just kidding, but seriously...

PS: You can watch this specific episode (#3) on:
http://www.mtv.com/ontv/dyn/dance_crew/videos-full-episodes.jhtml

2) National Man Day? Please be joking...

Just moments after submitting last week’s blog, I went on Facebook. I had an invitation to some random event called "National Man Day." Perfect...

Here is the description from Facebook, in all its man-tastic glory:

“This day is the day for all men to stand up and say, "Yes, I am a Man." And "Yes, I will step up and do manly things and whatever I want to do on this glorious day!" Come, make history! Be a part of National Man day. Take the world by the throat and tell them it's ok to watch Rocky movies all day. Tell them it's fine if you sit in your favorite chair and scratch yourself. Tell them it's normal to go shoot stuff or blow something up. Why? Because YOU ARE A MAN!!! You aren't some nancy that likes to frolic in the fields, unless it's a field of mines and you have an AK47 and a hand full of grenades... Then you really are a man! Yes on this day, men across the nation will be saying, "Screw you salad bar, with your salad and light dressings!" Men will step up and say, "I'll take that 20 oz steak, and yes, I'll eat it all. Because I'm a man!
National Man Day is about acting like a Man & taking responsibility for things we can control. Be a better father to your kids, hit the gym, punch a gorilla in the face, treat women like a gentleman, and most of all BE A MAN! A glorious testosterone filled MAN! I'm not asking you to throw some sissy party, or to go buy a new power tie because you're a man. All I'm asking you to do is step up live this day like a man would. Blow something up, shoot some animal, punch your buddy in the face for no reason, play football and literally knock someone's head off... Be a man like God intended you to be... Take this day and celebrate your manhood!”

As seen above, being masculine is apparently an amalgam of various things, from “literally knocking someone’s head off” to “being a good father.” It is somehow simultaneously, being a gentleman to women, but also a savage irrational caveman. It is also not being what the creator of the event considers “feminine,” which he describes using some epithets, like “nancy” and “sissy.” There seems to be a lot of hostility built up against those who do not blatantly act tough enough. I don’t really understand this extreme alpha-male sentiment, but apparently others subscribe to it. As of right now, over 170,000 people will take part in this event. For some strange reason, I’m thinking God didn’t really “intend” this.

This idea of manliness almost seems like a caricature, in response to what the creator probably sees as a rise in metrosexuality. For some reason, he feels a man acting less evidently “manly” is a problem. Gender roles really are changing, and this was just his way of dealing with it. I wish the best to anyone who is not a gunslinging, body building, animal killing, good father on Man Day.

Please know that I don’t really think anyone will be injured as a result of some ridiculous exhibition of manliness, as I'm sure that whoever created this event was doing it in jest. At least I hope so. But the fact that it was created at all really says something about some people’s ideas of masculinity in this country.

1) OBAMA-MAN TO THE RESCUE!

Ms. Magazine is a self-proclaimed feminist periodical. On the cover of the Winter 2009 "Special Inaugural Issue" is a photoshopped image of our current president. He's opening up his suit, like Superman does, to reveal a shirt that says, "THIS IS WHAT A FEMINIST LOOKS LIKE." Obama reportedly said, "I am a feminist," to the Feminist Majority Foundation chairwoman Peg Yorkin at a meeting. Plus, he supposedly has the strongest women's rights platform of any president so far.

Recently, however, this image and Ms. Magazine itself have come under fire by feminists. The criticism stems from the fact that Obama represents some kind of superhero in the image. Thus, people think it is implying that it takes a (super)man to save the feminists. I was not really aware that feminists were in any grave danger, so I don't really understand this argument.

First of all, I'm not a feminist, nor am I a male chauvinist or "masculist" (or whatever the opposite of a feminist is). I don't see the big deal with the picture. Maybe if GQ, Maxim, or some other strictly-male magazine had posted the image. And it had helpless women in the background (scantily-clad, to appease the target demographic, of course). And the caption on the shirt were more blatant, like "STEP ASIDE LADIES! OBAMA HERE, TO THE RESCUE!" Then, I'd see room for complaint. As it stands, though, this image was made the cover of a feminist magazine BY FEMINISTS THEMSELVES! So I highly doubt a feminist magazine would publish something they found offensive to women and feminists. If you take the time to read the article in the magazine, you'll see cover is meant to "capture both the national and feminist mood of high expectations and hope as the 44th President of the United States takes the oath of office." I think it achieves that.

Another criticism of the cover is that it is against the very values of feminism to have a male icon like this to be a feminist. That is ludicrous. It is completely hypocritical to say that men cannot also fight for women's rights. It's sexist and pretty much undermines the whole platform feminists stand for. How can you claim your goal is equality, if you don't like the idea of a man being a feminist? You can't. Either be a true equality-seeking feminist or the female version of the male chauvinists you hate so much. Pick one.

That's my two cents on the issue. It seems whoever is actually offended by this is just overly sensitive or reading too much into it. Not to mention, this victimhood over such a petty thing (especially one that is not even offensive!) kind of steps on the toes of the "strong woman" image that is so often portrayed. Put more energy into an issue that matters.