And what of the females that actually want to take part? Surely women have the right to do what they want with their body. It's not for others to dictate. Leave the competition alone.

On the website it says the money goes to Cancer Research UK, which fund experiments on animals. Another reason why some people way wish the contest ill will.

Why do you think the women want to take part?

Perhaps it is because they understand that although they are studying at university, that they will always be judged first and foremost on their physical appearance. That as a woman in today's society, they are going to be looked at and judged both by men and by other women.

To line women up, have them parade around competing with each other to be chosen as the best is demeaning

Possibly they cannot see this because they have internalised the beauty myth to such an extent that in a kind of fog of post-feminist nonsense they actually want that kind of attention. That is a very sad thing.

Furthermore, this is a commercial company profiting from this social anxiety, exploiting inequality for a quick buck.

Yes, the issues of gender and women's complicity in the patriarchy are complicated; it is a complex social issue. However beauty pageants aren't complicated. They are stupid. They are offensive. They are dangerous for the women involved and for women in a wider sense. So I don't think it should be left alone.

yawn

rthing, fact is though most people like sporty bodies of either sex, its natural, its not fascist. A sense of humour is usually v.attractive to women with timing, men often have to work on that or they are lucky2have it naturally. Men are more attracted to a sporty looking woman, this can take some effort also.
Sometimes theres resentment as capitalism often means men or women with natural attributes earn more money etc unairly to survive in a undemocratic capitalist system, it the system that sucks though.
PC can be so boring, the animal testing was only mentioned as a afterthought, this stolidness puts many people off imc sometimes. The sign could have said men arent workhorses, next to building site, but fact is most men want work& like most people to be treated fairly.

Why do you think the women want to take part?
Perhaps it is because they......

I'm sure if you asked any woman who has been a in beauty contest or has been a bond girl etc, they will all disagree with your points. Just because you can't doesn't mean others don't want to

'Woman' asks: "Why do you think the women want to take part?"

If you don't know, it means you haven't asked them - which means that you're treating these women with the same dismissive patriarchy that you claim they are victims of. Here you are talking *about* these women without evidently ever having consulted them or asked what they want or think. You stand there telling them what they're *supposed* to think and feel - as if they don't have a brain and can't think for themselves. They're apparently poor, dumb and defenceless, and you think you must rescue them. Just like a man!

Yes Anita, of course you have the right. Cos feminism's all about having the freedom to do whatever the hell you want right?! With zero thought or responsibility for how you might be contributing to a culture which oppresses and demeans other females.

I can admire an attractive person as much as the next guy, but this competition does look a bit tacky and tawdry.

It also encourages commodification of women and promotion of superficiality.

I'm not sure what the solution is though. Could a law be worded to make such events illegal? I'm not sure it could, or even if such a law is desirable.

We need to create a society where women don't feel they have to go in for these competitions to try to boost their self-esteem or whatever other reasons they have.

Surely being attractive, witty and intelligent is its own reward? You don't need to enter a competition to benefit from it.

I'm loving the apparently liberated posts on this. Yes, that's celebrate the freedom to take part in a fucking beauty contest. You mugs. Your line of misinformation has waylaid very clear feminist demands for equality for decades in favour of theoretical bullshit. Lets get together and have evil sex and you can write on your blog about how post-patriarchy it is to choose to get spaff on your baps; outside the inequality of women will continue unabashed.

I'm opposed to this cos its fucking insulting to humanity in general. Its crass, sad, demeaning. Its boring. It makes me die a little inside to tolerate it.

cheers to anarch fem for not being a retard

PS - the competition is at its final bout, i'm afraid entering now will do nothing.

PPS - NO OF COURSE WE DON'T NEED A LAW BANNING THIS YOU FUCKTARD. We need to deal with it ourselves, on an equal basis.

In your opinion.

anyone that is upset by this, really has too much free time on their hands.

"I can admire an attractive person as much as the next guy.."
What do you mean by "attractive"? Do you mean in terms of appearance?
In which case, are you not responsible for this "promotion of superficiality", and creating this unequal society?

What do you mean by "attractive"? Do you mean in terms of appearance?
In which case, are you not responsible for this "promotion of superficiality", and creating this unequal society?

Wouldn't of thought so. More likely its the product of 4 billion years of evolutional hard-wiring that makes people human beings. Being human with human feelings is much more important than an equal society where everyone is exactly the same like some futuristic dystopia

> "I can admire an attractive person as much as the next guy.."
> What do you mean by "attractive"? Do you mean in terms of appearance?

No, I mean general attraction. People are attracted to some people and not to others for a variety of reasons: looks, personality, etc. That's just inbuilt nature for humans, there is no use denying that.

> In which case, are you not responsible for this "promotion of superficiality", and creating this unequal society?

Well, I am sometimes superficially attracted to someone purely based on looks, I admit. I'm not sure why, it must be some basic thing hardwired into the brain. I'm sure everyone has this experience. One theory is you are attracted to people who look like your mother (and thus yourself), because that is the first face you see after birth and during your formative years and it imprints on you somehow as an "ideal" of what a face should look like.

If I inwardly admire someone based on superficial things like looks, I don't think it does any harm to society or to women in particular (assuming it is a woman I am admiring). It's only when I share my thought with others or run contests like the one here that there is a problem, because then I am "promoting" it.

I'm sure that most (heterosexual) women will have superficial attractions to some men also, so I don't think the basic thing is one-way. The imbalance comes from how women are treated and valued by society, not by our individual instinctive attraction for some people and not others.

Of course, in the long term what's inside is much more important that the outside, but we can't deny that initial attraction based on looks.

Feminism is one activist arena that has seen serious declines in my own lifetime. The fact university students would promote such a 'pageant' is symbolic of the fact that victories need to be constantly reinforced like sandcastles on a beach.

The trouble seems to lie in the confusion between sexuality and exploitation. Why shouldn't women exploit their own bodies for their own financial and social progression? And why shouldn't students sell their bodies to finance their studies?

The answer is because we will rape you. We will beat you and abuse you and treat you like any other inanimate sex toy. That is what beauty parades are all about. Get your tits out, crawl around on all fours on the stage or else you are just teasing us.

Miss University London promotes rape. Her 'vital statisics' are that rape and sexual abuse is the biggest threat to women in our society reinforcing her status as sub-human. This is sexuality confined to the business world where the worth of a female is in her looks and the worth of a man is in his wallet.

And it doesn't have to be this way. In the 60's 'free love' was an advert for revolutionary practice -why pay a prostitutes pimp when sex is free? In the 80's any 'beauty queen' would have been ripped to shreds at any activist meeting.

I can't see a way for a man like me to progress this when supposedly activist women support their own objectification. I'd characterise the male responses here as 'slimers' who often post under female pseudonymns to pursue their 'dirt'. There are many ways for women to act sexually in public without sucking businessmens cock. It only takes a little imagination to turn macho-fests like this into genuinely empowering events. In this context though the participants are just dim-witted billboards advertising the rapes of others.


You know you turn me on
Eyes so white and legs so long
But don't try to talk to me
I won't listen to your lies
You're just an object in my eyes
You're just an object in my eyes

Sophisticated smile
You seduce in such fine style
But don't try to fool me
'cause I can see through your disguise
You're just an object in my eyes
You're just an object in my eyes

But I don't mind
I just don't care
I've got no objection
To you touching me there

Object object
Object object
Object object
Object object

You know just what to do
Lick your lips
And I want you
But don't try to hold me
'cause I don't want any ties
You're just an object in my eyes
You're just an object in my eyes

But I don't mind
I just don't care
I've got no objections
To you touching me there
You're just an object object
Object object
You're just an object