Men for women rights! Finally.


I can't believe I didn't think of this! It was right there, hanging off my body the whole time: boobs, they will get men involved. I mean, all I have to do is objectify my body *a little* to make sure men are paying attention to my health and rights. Never mind my over all health but as long as my breast are there, free of cancerous lumps and not deformed in anyway... men will fight for us women.

As women that is where my identity comes from, right? And the only way men are interested in me is if I allow them to look at my breast, right?


This is absolutely ridiculous, Katie, thank you for sharing. I appreciate what you're getting at here-- how strange indeed that women are breasts and men are dicks (ha). This totally fits right into notions of passing if we go back to Mattilda... Those two-three (or more, I suppose) bulges do mark where normative identity and desire are supposed to come from and end up, once subjectivity is all said and done. And isn't weird that women, viewed as lacking in the phallus department, are then reduced not to genitals (because they don't stick out much) but to boobs.

Breasts: the second best protrusions, not because they hold power but because they are fascinating marks of difference to men.

To queer a bit: lots of bodies have all kinds of different boobs, and lots of subjects desire to do all kinds of different things with and to said boobs. Cancer in the boob region can occur in any body, but it just so happens that the bodies society labels women happen to usually have more tissue there (even that is pretty debatable, as my wording may suggest). As usual, I ask: who gets left out of this discourse on breasts? And why are men endeavoring to "save" women (just how many places have we seen that before)?

I watched this last night when I was deliriously tired, and I took it really personally -- I think it might have hurt my feelings, even. I never like this men to save the defenseless women nonsense, and it's come up quite a bit recently on the blog, which is interesting. I've already talked about the Khaki ad posted in relation to the Girl Mechanics book, but here again, we're forced to "recognize" that (white) Men are the world's heroes and women should really put away their feminist silliness and just let guys be guys. This video seems like it was very good-intentioned... but like Remy pointed out, it's not just a female-body issue -- it's not just a 'boob' issue, either. Fighting Breast Cancer is not about saving boobs, it's about saving lives. Are women's lives no longer valuable if their breasts are removed for the sake of saving those lives? I'm reminded of David Reimer here -- once the bodily protrusion that defines a gendered body is no longer recognizable as that protrusion, what happens to gender? what happens to personhood? For David, it led to all sorts of painful intrusions and rejections -- and this ad suggests the same for women who have "lost" their breasts to cancer: even speaking about it as a "loss" reflects the power gender-signifiers have over the bodied subject. This "Men for Women Now" campaign seems very phallogocentric on top of it all -- it appeals to men by propagating that men who care about breast cancer are Real Men, and that if they're not interested in saving "boobs" that they're not masculine enough.

Remy and Mary, you raise some very awsome and interesting points. I cant believe that this is a real campaign, it's very saddening. It positions women as only consisting of breasts, presumes that only "women" get breast cancer and also is a very disgusting message to men that "hey it's OK to support things like breast cancer research, as long as your doing it for purely sexual reasons." This should be considered very offensive and insensitive to those fighting this disease as well as to their partners, families and friends.