[Miscellany]

It's been a funny old contemplative weekend.  I caught up with an old friend on Friday night.  K is resplendent in the later stages of her pregnancy and I am torn with being so happy for her and with noticing my own utter lack in this department.  Soon I will be the only one in that particular friendship group sans child.  This is not exactly a welcome concept, mostly due to the fact that our conversations already revolve around poop and children and never around those philosophical and political arguments that we used to have and I wonder how much more baby centered they can become.  It scares me for the state of our friendship, how much longer can I sustain not ever being asked how I am?  Maybe soon I'll be able to slip away in the middle of a conversation and steal into the gin cupboard and no one will even notice.  Even the crazy little voice inside my head is now telling me I need new friends that are at the same stage in life as I am that is (spinsters and lunatics). 

K and I were still able to have a rational conversation on the account of the child still being in utero so we made the most of it by me moaning about my job and her looking at me pityingly and K discussing her fears about giving birth and me (unwisely) advising her to take all the drugs available (preferably at once).  The birth thing sounds rather hard, scary and horrible but I can't pity it.  It's a beautiful miracle and she is so fortunate to have the love in her life that has afforded this experience for her.  I am trying to think of the fortunate things in my life.  I keep coming up with 'at least I'm not homeless' or 'I never have to compromise over the remote control', which is absolutely true but also kind of sad if that is the best I can do.

EM whom I had dinner with last night is in my predicament but she has made peace with her childless, spinster state.  I don't even know how you would begin to do that.  I'm the opposite.  Case in point - this is the photo I'm staring at right now as I type this.  It lives on the wall of my study.



It's beautiful, no?  It's a vision of (my) stupid, ridiculous hope and although I love looking at it I hate that I harbor these hopes still.  It only makes it harder to move on with my life.

Despite that difference between EM and I, we are of one mind when it comes to the plight of the single lady in her 30s.  I like having friends who completely understand what it is like not to want to go to weddings alone and lament on the unfairness of always giving the gift but never being the recipient of any.  Also this:




Anyway we are now living in post-feminist glory (apparently) and a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle (or so I've heard) but my God, when will the wilderness years be over?  I don't give a shit about being independent or see taking the garbage out as a 'win' in the division of labour.  I don't see being single as freeing at all.  In fact I think you are more restricted as a single person.  I can't quit my job and 'find myself'.  Who exactly is going to pay the mortgage when I do that?  If I get sick, there is a series of complicated measures I have to go through in order to get through it.  There's no depending on someone to pick up the slack when things go wrong.  I am not so much fearing being eaten by Alsatians as I am planning it now.

As for breeding.  I can almost literally hear the tick-tocking of that old biological clock ringing in my ears and I realise that this is it.  Halle Berry may be able to get away with having a baby in her late 40s but I won't be able to.  It's now or never and this scares me because... well now is ...NOW.  I have thought about this a bit and I have my own set of morals here about the subject but is it selfish to 'go it alone?'   I'm not counting it out completely, but let's just say I'm not making any appointments to the clinic either...

I'm not even sure what the point of this entry is.  I was going to write about the beauty in the passage of time as symbolised in seeing Before Midnight with K but um... I guess not.  Sorry about that.

Labels: babies, dirty femmo, friends, girls and women, messy women, rant, singletons, there is no life after babies for the mothers in the equation but maybe they don't mind so much anyway, what women want, women

posted by M at 10:28 pm 11 comments

I've watched the show on and off for the last few weeks and it's not bad. Basically How to Look Good Naked takes a new woman every episode who hates her own body (with a gut wrenching passion) and shows her how to love it, just as it is - perhaps with a little bit of frosting by way of a better bra/hair do but essentially without an extreme makeover. Pretty good idea, huh?*

There are so many women who hate their bodies. I have never met one woman in my life who is completely at ease with her body. I don't even know OF any women who are completely at ease with their body actually. I do however know size 6 (I think that's size 0 in the US) women who complain they are fat, who live at the gym, who think their legs are fat. It's wrong. Perhaps one might be more accepting of their own body after years of dieting or after the extreme makeover like you see on the those TV shows but as a whole we women are very good at hating our bodies. I think the stats the show talks about is that 4 out of every 5 American women hate their body and people who we see in magazines are skinnier than 98% of us. It's really no wonder we have a problem with normality when what we compare ourselves to is completely unrealistic?

Know anyone with an eating disorder?
Ever had one yourself?

I'm guessing there would be a lot of yes answers to that - it's sad.

I think the biggest problem with all this is that hating your body means that:
1) you don't get out there and live your life.
2) you are more vulnerable to feeling less worthy than a magazine cover that has been airbrushed.
3) you feel like shit.
If 4 out of 5 women feels like that then wow, how easy would it be to keep us girls down? Pretty fucking easy. It's always easier to make people with low self worth feel even worse about themselves.

Easily my favourite part of the show is when the girl in question is asked to slot herself into a line of near naked ladies - in accordance to the size she thinks she is. Every woman's self image so far has been of herself being larger than she is. They slot themselves into the larger side. That says a lot about self perception.



Even if the girls were being modest during this and don't see themselves as large (even though they put themselves down the larger end of the line) it says a lot about how we women represent and view ourselves. If 4 out of every 5 women feel like crap because they're not good enough for some reason or another then 4 out of every 5 women are not big noting themselves, even when they do deserve it. I'm reminded of this:

Research in Linda Babcock’s 2004 book Women Don’t Ask: Negotiation and the Gender Divide, found that 93 per cent of female graduates from a US university simply accepted the starting salaries they were offered in their first job, while more than half of the male graduates tried to negotiate up.

Is it any wonder this happens? 4 out of 5 women can't even look at themselves in the mirror, do you really think these same women are going to ask for a pay rise? Um, no. I'm not saying this is all due to hating our bodies but I do think that yes, it's all tied in with a greater feeling of unworthiness for us. Who knows where it really comes from originally (do we go back to Eve?), and who knows why we willingly adhere to it so readily by buying into the beauty myth time and again but yes, it exists, yes it's very real, yes it affects our everyday lives.

Probably though the biggest question I have coming out of the show How to Look Good Naked though is why it takes a gay man to tell us women to love ourselves? You'd think a woman would be willing to tell us because we should love ourselves, or perhaps the straight men who are supposed to love us for who we are could let us know. No? Not going to happen any time soon huh? Interesting.

In the meanwhile - while we all scramble to get our acts together. Thank you, Carson (and Gok Wan - also openly gay and hosted the original series) <3


* Honestly I've heard some people argue that this kind of show is horrible simply because we shouldn't let people believe that they are beautiful when they so obviously are not (ie: they are too fat and since fat is not beautiful by society's standrads then they shouldn't be allowed to love themselves because if they loved themselves then they wouldn't lose weight). This kind of argument disgusts me to no end.

On to music - Their first album Lesser Matters has been on constant rotation in my car over the last few weeks. I can't tell you how much I am loving this band lately. This song is particular makes me want to run through a valley of golden wild flowers for some reason. I have strange fantasies.

Where Damage Isn't Already Done - The Radio Dept.

Labels: bodies, crap reality tele, dirty femmo, messy women, questions, real women, the price of beauty, TV, women, wonderings

posted by M at 10:09 pm 16 comments

Being a non-babied up person living in a world where it seems like everyone has spawned has afforded me the opportunity to observe things without being too emotionally involved. I have my pet peeves with how mums and dads behave just like I have my pet peeves by how ordinary everyday people behave. In fact, one might argue that I have a lot of pet peeves. Oh well, I'm peevey - you really got a problem with that?

A little issue has arisen lately in baby-land and I have to say, it's given me more peeves than ever thought possible. I'm talking about how people react to the weight of babies. Now I realise that weight is probably the most important way that one can distinguish how healthy a baby is but I'm not talking about that. It's the language that people use.

My friend S's little miracle (really, he actually is - spend first couple of months at the Children's hospital and really was touch and go for a while there) has been growing in leaps and bounds since he was released from the hospital. Really he is one of the cutest babies in the world. He's one of those babies that strangers will boldly approach and want to hold. Things started off a little rough for the poor guy but now he's doing well. In fact when people see him how they ALWAYS comment about what a big boy he is, and how chubby he is getting and ...hey maybe mum should be putting him on a little feeding restriction. The thing is little N is not like those big babies you see on Phil Donohue where the baby is actually half the size of mum at 1 year of age and looks basically like an adult in diapers (though, I might be confusing this with a whoooole other episode of Donohue). Little N is in fact precisely in the 50th percentile for his weight. He's the epitome of normality. He's not 1 percent below or above he's just right. Meanwhile mothers of babies born on the 15th percentile are commenting about what a chubbster N is - not in a nice way either - in an I'm slightly worried about your baby way - patronising, utterly patronising. Like as if being born thin and still thin is somehow better than than being normal and healthy.

The reason why it's a peeve of mine is that I can see where this is leading. We already have this preoccupation with children's weight and the so-called obesity crisis in children. I wish I could link to an entry that "pubby" wrote about this issue but he's taken his blog offline - but he also asked whether these figures were sincere because he hadn't noticed that suddenly all these kids were supposedly fat. I work with kids. I see kids everyday and there is probably 1 per class who is overweight. IF THAT. I don't have any this year at all. In fact I'm looking at all the children I know who started school this year and there is not ONE who would even be considered chubby - that's almost 100 new children! Figures point to something like 40% of children being fat but from what I've seen it's actually about 5% which is called a NORMAL DISTRIBUTION of fat folks. Maybe it's 10% in some areas...yes, more concerning but still, hardly an epidemic! I don't know if figures are being inflated or whether the way we measure fat is right off the scale (pun intended) but if it's an epidemic then I don't bloody see it at all.

The point is the weight obsession starts with babies. All these mothers (let's face it, mostly mums) are obsessed with talking about the weight of their own children but not only that, I sense some smugness and defensiveness about weight, depending on where on the percentile the baby falls. Once I commented on how F's baby J had grown into a big boy. I hadn't seen him in about 3 months and he was like a new child. So what, he got big! Big deal, it's great, it's called growing. But I got flicked with the end of the wrath stick quick smart by F who snapped that actually he's only on the 30th percentile now and not big at all. Ohhhhh kay, sorry didn't think I was suggesting that your baby was a sumo wrestler but hey, whatever.

Incidentally why is it so wrong to say that a female baby is a "big strong girl". Ever try saying that one? It's like you're saying "hey I've just noticed that your daughter is a big fat dyke. I can see that she's a breath away from letting her body hair get to unflattering lengths and start listening to angry girl rock" I thought, growing was supposed to be a good thing! Maybe not in girls.

In other news concerning dirty femmo stuff, I was intrigued by a column in Sunday's Age by Angela Pippos "What's Wrong with Being a Fashionista Feminist Anyway?" where she addresses just how diverse feminists are in this era. She also says

I'm a feminist. Was that so hard?
It's really not a big deal. I simply believe that women should be given the same opportunities as men. Throw me in in the river and see if I float. It's hardly radical but, in my experience, any mention of the "f" word in male company can bring on a type of behaviour often seen in a David Attenborough documentary, followed by a sudden attack of mundane questioning".

She goes on to list a few examples of questioning she is immediately dealt by affronted men "Do you expect men to open doors for you?" "Do you want a man to pay for dinner on a first date?" etc. You know the typical questions asked of femnos that makes everyone want to stab their eyes out. What really interests me about her column is the underlying question for me about feminism. Why is it still a dirty word? Yes, I'm being serious. In all my years of being a feminist I've never met one who hates men. I've never met one who burns her bra. I've never met one who spends all night planing to picket the local men's club or any of the other stereotypes that are prescribed to so called ..here is comes "feminazis". Do I know lesbian femmos? Of course. Does that mean ALL feminists are gay? Do I know femmos who are frustrated by the status quo and frustrated by some perceptions perpetrated by men. Hell yes, does that mean that they are frustrated with men in general? Pssssh, I don't think so. I hate that type of generalising of feminists that happens but actually has little grounds in reality.

I don't know about you but when I hear the old "you're a man hater" (often comes in a feminist type entry) and it's been written here on this journal as well me reading it on so many other feminist blogs that I've lost count - I often think that the person writing it either has shit for brains, doesn't actually KNOW any feminists or rather...doesn't KNOW any women AT ALL or that maybe..just maybe THEY don't really like women all that much themselves, or feel threatened by them expressing an opinion - whatever. The fact that I *am* a feminist and I don't actually know ANY feminists who hate men NOR do I hate them myself sort of makes me wonder why on earth that's a phrase that is so easily thrown around by others when confronted with someone who claims to be a feminist? I mean I always hear about these so-called feminists who are supposed to hate men, usually it comes in the form of "yeah I know a feminist who hates men" but you know..it's sort of like an urban myth to me. Have you heard the one about the lady with the boil on her face that exploded and 50 tiny spiders came out? Yeah, that common. If anything feminists have so much problem in appearing a unified group with unifying beliefs in the first place that *men* aren't even the issue. It's women and what women think that is more of an issue.

Perhaps it's that feminist discourse is centered around the fact that things are not quite right in the world of woman. That there are certain issues that affect our gender and those issues maybe be life threatening or indeed socially confining to women. Maybe there's some resentment too, that women get the focus for this type of discourse? The fact that they are discussed might be a little too confronting for some people and confused with hate - when really it's not about hate at all, it's about getting answers and asking WHY does this happen to women? Is that a wrong question to ask? I certainly don't think so. It does NOT negate the FACT that things happen to men too and that is an important point. That in fact we are all individuals who have shit happen to us at some stage or another and that there are issues for men that are just as concerning that in fact SHOULD be discussed too. They should be discussed by the same people that are complaining that are sick of hearing about women's issues and say that yeah, men have issues too can't you see that? Well, dude, discuss away! Indeed, asking why the world is a certain way is not about hating anyone. It's about trying to get answers about how things are and perhaps start discourse that will affect change. One can only hope anyway.

I know that discussions about rape, prostitution, maternity leave and domestic violence gets a lot of backs up, especially with men but the fact of the matter is that these things DO happen and they DO happen mostly to women and the fact that we make up more than half the population means that it's something that everyone should be worried about. These are things that SHOULD be discussed widely and without refrain. It happens and the fact that it happens disturbingly often to one gender over another is a cause for feminist discourse. Live with it! I've read so many "anti-feminist" blogs (mostly written by anonymous people with anonymous comments - just goes to show doesn't it?) that will reference one article where a woman has beaten her husband in a show of domestic violence. Yes it happens and this is horrible. I don't want to diminish that - but the anti-feminist blogger will then say (and this happens in almost 100 percent of all anti-feminist bloggers) something along the lines of "and now you see why I refuse to get involved with all women. Women are evil etc etc". This is in direct opposition to most feminist blogs which takes issue on women's issues in society and how that affects us and in fact are a celebration of female achievement in the arts and culture. They are positive places that actually reserve any condensation of men to specific examples ie: THIS MAN said something not quite right about women. THIS MAN is wrong. Whereas the anti-feminist blogs that I've read are all about generalising one act to mean *all* women and being defensive about it too. Perhaps I've yet to come across a anti-feminist blog that is about being male positive instead of female negative. I'm know that there are some feminist blogs that really ARE venomous about a lot of things too, including men but definitely not the popular ones. The popular feminist blogs are generally very political places that invite discussion by men and indeed a lot of them have a dedicated male following too.

For the record I have read many male written gender positive blogs that have nothing to do with anti-feminism - they don't shy away from bringing up issues that are specific to men either! They are great and there should be more of them. They write about male and female issues with sex, violence and everything in between and they are so great because they don't fall into that age old trap of 'what I admire about women is their breasts, bum, legs, they look beautiful, they smell beautiful' - which is quite typical in what DOES tend to get written about women from a male perspective. I mean that kind of blog is great and all but male blogs that go beyond that REALLY need to be applauded for being so great - and they're not great because I agree with them, because I don't always, they're great because they are truthful without falling into "all feminists are bitches" type rhetoric.

Considering that not all feminists are the same, nor do any of the old stereotypes stand up why is it that the F-word is still a dirty one?

Anyway, on to Musical Monday in this haphazard post of mine. Of course, let's just complete the entry with a reference to Kat Bjelland; an artist I'm pretty much so in awe of I can't quite figure out the right words. She looks like an angel but has the voice of a terrifying demon. That's the best I can come up with. In the early days she cavorted around with Courtney Love and Jennifer Finch experimenting in a couple of bands before all went their separate ways and all became highly influential artists in their own right, with their own bands. I sigh here as I make the distinction and say they were 'female centered' bands - grrl rock if you will. Why? Oh because I've featured many, many bands who have all male members and sing about manly things but never distinguished them by saying 'all male' or 'male centered'. It's funny how these distinctions work in rock for women as opposed to men but there you have it.

Babes in Toyland had been around for a good many years before I got into them. I was completely taken with Kat Bjelland and in particular her rock operatic meets screaming banshee type singing voice.

She was a cheerleader in high school by the way.

A cheerleader AND a dirty femmo too. Oh my god, is your mind about to explode? Yes, it's true, us dirty femmos aren't just one type of person. I guess, that was my whole point. Mother's can be feminists. Hot girls can be feminists. Women who love men can be feminists. Scientists can be feminists. Radio personalities can be feminists. Men can be feminists. Cheerleaders can be feminists. It's not just one type of person. And for the record I've read many a comment implying that those people mentioned above CAN'T be feminists - like mum's can't be feminists. ha! Well I'm linking right here to a GREAT entry by a femmo mum who outlines some great points about how to raise your daughter a feminist and you know what? The initial question about 'how do I raise my daughter a feminist?' came from a bloke. How's that for breaking down a few barriers. Yes folks, it's not actually about man hating. Sorry to disappoint - on with the music.

Bruise Violet - Babes In Toyland (apparently not about Courtney Love..but I doubt it! lol).



Sweet 69 - Babes in Toyland

Labels: babies, dirty femmo, girls and women, messy women, musical monday, real women, vicious women, what women want, why, why do people get so touchy when it comes to talking about these things?, women

posted by M at 4:45 pm 23 comments

Around the time when I got into PJ Harvey there was a lot of talk in the media about "women in rock". Wow, like the final frontier had been crossed ...or something. The suffragettes had infiltrated the sacred guitar scene - lord, apparently getting the vote wasn't enough they just HAD to go the axe too.

A lot of these so called women in rock talked about being role models for young girls who had few female guitarists to look up to. Of course, they were right. You can find women there in the rock scene. They are there. It's just that they aren't necessarily always where you can see them. It's not so much a lack of women in the music business but that not a lot of fame was ever attributed to women who wrote their own stuff, played their own instruments and did their own thing and all without a stylist - unless of course these women were already stunning in their own right. Image is harder to control in an "artist" than in a "product" and for women there has always been this compromise between the two when it comes to fame. Even for those that start out as artists, soon we see the product emerge in a little fashion tip here or there, a good colourist and finally losing about 20 pounds (whether she needed it or not) and a boob job just because she was "doing it for herself". One doesn't see a whole lot of meatloaf women or Alice cooper women in the mainstream and yet, they exist - believe me.

Anyway, it was the mid-late 90s and I was in a phase of musical discovery and was especially looking for artists which impressed me with their music rather than their lipstick. I was feeling a bit rebellious. Okay, sure maybe for women it will always be about both, but in my mind if there's a bazillion (butt ugly) male musicians out there who garner reverence for their talent, I don't see why there can't be the same for women. And yet, there are still only a handful of these women out there and I wonder if it's because women are out there but are overlooked because they aren't pretty enough to market or whether they AREN'T out there because ROCK isn't pretty enough for THEM. The later scares the shit out of me actually.

But anyway, I spent a lot of time in those mid 90s years in record stores, often picking up new albums at whim to give them a try. Maybe I liked the look of the cover, or had vaguely heard of the artist but of none of the songs, or maybe it was a one off recommendation... Whatever the reason, it was a fun way to spend my disposable cash.

I picked up Dry by PJ Harvey one golden afternoon after a rather long day at uni. I brought it home and listened to it without skipping one track. It was dark, deep, desperate, soulful and red, red raw - which was how men tended to serve their rock, but not women - not so much anyway. It was almost ugly and I just loved it for that. The album art itself *is* ugly, sickly - PJ's dry raw lips framed by a greenish zombie like chin and cheek - which by the way is in direct contrast to her Down By the Water video clip, where she is pristine and beautiful. I do love me some PJ Harvey beautiful or not but for me, it will always be about the album Dry.

I love, love, love this song.

Oh My Lover - PJ Harvey
(...not for the faint hearted)

Labels: gender stuff, girls and women, messy women, musical monday

posted by M at 12:09 am 12 comments

You know what Kylie Minogue? I just don't get it. I just don't get you. You've got money, you have a bazillion gay fans, you can wear hot pants without a hint of irony and still make it work and you beat the big C over the head with spiky stick but you are still a magnet for deadbeat men.

There have been many though these were the lucky, lucky, lucky few that lasted longer than a few weeks.

1) Jason Donovan. Okay, there was nothing wrong with him except that he had a mullet but then again YOU had a mullet TOO! You were MFEO, goddamn you I'm still waiting for you two to walk down the isle while Suddenly plays in the background in a quaint little church in the Dandenong Mountains...fer real this time. I fully blame you for his addiction to drugs and foray into reeeeeally bad sappy pop music and finally into ugly land. Lady before you fucked with him he was every nice Smash Hits magazine reading young lass' wet dream. That is all.



2) Michael Hutchence. I totally get it - he was completely fucked up but sexy as hell. Maybe even being fucked up made him sexy as hell. It's a hard thing for a girl in her early 20s to resist, I know. Then again, he was a serial womanizer who was totally seeing other women the whole time he was with you. Then after dumping you the next thing you know he's married to a wacko and then...bam! Dead. I'm not saying you were to blame however, Jase up at #1 didn't fare so well after dealing with you either. Did I mention the words "serial womanizer"?





3) James Gooding - dude used you for sex and then sold your story to the tabloids in a simultaneous dump/humiliation move. Yeah, he was a real keeper. Again - serial womanizer






4) Pauly Shore - well I don't think he hurt YOU at all but my god woman it's PAULY SHORE, even Brendan Fraser in that cracker of a moive Encino Man was more articulate and 'human' like than him - what the fuck were you thinking? I mean jeez, I don't understand.









5) Olivier Martinez. Two words: Love Rat. Here's another two words: serial womanizer. Lady, every single person who has ever picked up a copy of NW while waiting in the check out line at Safeway knew that he was cheating on you and we all groaned simultaneously when we found out that you took him back...again..and again..and again. Okay, Frenchy stayed by your side during your battle with cancer but I'm a cynical bitch and I'm going to say what we we've all been thinking but were too nice to say: The man didn't want to be publicly known as the bastard who dumped Kylie while she had cancer. So..he stayed with you through that and then waited until you were well again before he took up with some young thing..just like he always meant to (or always was). This doesn't make him a "good person for being by your side" but instead a "dickhead that needs his nuts kicked in good and proper".

(honorable mention: That married guy who took you out on hit yacht for a "friendly" trip. Yes, married. No, no one actually believed you were 'just friends').


Girlfriend do I really have to remind you that you are rich, famous, gorgeous and un-wrinkly? What more could a man want in a woman (well so they keep saying anyway)? And this is coming from someone who doesn't even like you. I think you're a vapid attention whore who sings shit songs that are only good for a bout of retro dancing and nostalgia - but even I; a member of the ever hurtful Kylie critics can see that you are automatically five thousand per cent better than any guy out there that has the privilege of being on your arm.

Honey, it's time to go lez.

What is it with fabulous girls who can manage mammoth careers and have it all but can't resist the charms of dead beat idiots? I know so, so many absolutely wonderful (and conventionally beautiful) women who are surrounded by deadbeats! What the hell is going on?

Labels: mean men, messy women, pop culture, relationships, what women want, wonderings

posted by M at 10:44 pm 12 comments

I'm about to admit something here: I don't hate Courtney Love. I know, isn't everyone supposed to hate her?

Sure, she's a completely delusional, lipstick smeared, liposuction loving, botox injecting, peroxided to the shithouse, bitchy, slutty, fame-whoring, Lying, over opinionated, messy, allegedly talentless crackhead. But I don't hate her.

I can't say I love her either but I sit somewhere between appalled and fascinated on Courtney Love. I get this distinct feeling about her that for a lot of people she's the girl you fuck but don't ever tell anyone about. As a big Nirvana fan the pairing between Kurt and Courtney seemed a little strange to me - she was always so volatile and explosive in her pain and lashing out at anyone who would listen whereas he was contemplative and kept the pain in his stomach. Maybe they each complimented that side that each of them lacked. I don't know.

I remember reading Kurt say this

They actually tried to beat us up. Courtney and I were with the baby in the eating area backstage, and Axl walked by. So Courtney yelled, "Axl! Axl, come over here!" We just wanted to say hi to him--we think he's a joke, but we just wanted to say something to him. So I said, "Will you be the godfather of our child?" I don't know what had happened before that to piss him off, but he took his aggressions out on us and began screaming bloody murder. These were his words: "You shut your bitch up, or I'm taking you down to the pavement." [laughs] Everyone around us just burst out into tears of laughter. She wasn't even saying anything mean, you know? So I turned to Courtney and said, "Shut up, bitch!" And everyone laughed and he left.

That was of course, about the run in between Kurt and Axl Rose at the MTV Music Awards. I remember reading that and thinking that Kurt and Courtney sounded sort of like a team - which is cool. Then of course there are the rumours that she stole his songs, cheated on him and had him killed. You can't win.

When Kurt died she both crumbled and then built herself up out of the ashes like a Phoenix. If you were paying attention around that time the whole thing was utterly heartbreaking and amazing at the same time. Did she exploit his death? Yes probably, but I don't know if it was all her choice either - not even Kurt could get away from the media (try as he might) as they, (he so eloquently put it) 'raped' him. The spotlight was always going to be on her post-Kurt. Perhaps Courtney raped them back, or held up a mirror so her spotlight reflected brighter than ever. In any case she was both crucified and revered by the media - they simultaneously praised her and then stabbed her until the bile came out..then they praised her again.

I was entering my mid teens when she exploded everywhere and I guess you could say I was angry at the world. The same year that Kurt died my own father died too - and the music around that time was shall we say - appropriate - to feed my own feelings of displacement and anger at life. Courtney Love was nothing if not relevant.

I listened to and enjoyed Hole's early albums Pretty on the Inside and Live Through This (rather crassly released a week after Kurt died) as well as My Body the Hand Grenade. I read her interviews in various Rock magazines trying to piece together a coherent picture of her, and of Kurt I guess. I just couldn't - she was too random. Sometimes she was eloquent and clever and other times she was just a mess. A complicated woman to enjoy. Maybe it was just easier to hate her - she was oft accused of being ugly or fat, or a feminist or a plagiariser, or talentless, an exploiter and annoying. Yes, much easier to hate her but ...I couldn't.

She was too interesting to hate. Always falling apart and then sewing herself up again. She said what she thought and to hell with who heard about it. I've lost count of how many people there have been that deny they had anything to do with Courtney, but there she was again, spilling the beans on everyone. Plus, she never seemed afraid of being 'un-lady like' (try writing whore and slut on your arm and see where it gets you in the lady stakes) - except when she put on a suit and let Barbara Walters interview her. Soon after that, the hair became more natural looking, the makeup applied properly, she started crossing her legs and keeping her boobs in - and of course, lost about 20 pounds. That's when she came across as afraid.

This is interesting about those messy women - not being feminine means being loud, obnoxious, messy, opinionated, out of control, ugly and fat - all of which Courtney, pre-Barbara interview was accused of being. And of course, all of which could be used to describe a great deal of male rock stars. There is an incredible double standard which Courtney herself has addressed on numerous occasions. For a girl, not being feminine will get you laughed at, or worse infamous instead of simply famous. The double standard is never more apparent when someone like Courtney goes from a mess to a prize. Suddenly no one had a bad word to say about her - she was Milos Forman's IT girl and Vanity Fair wanted to do nice interviews with her for once. It didn't do her persona any harm mind you and she knew what she was doing. Musically she was nothing at this point, in my opinion she lost it when she put on the suit - but then again, finally she was accepted,even if it was only for a short time.

But musically speaking there's another can of worms...

There aren't that many women who can delve into rock music without sublimating their guitar holding with pristine femininity. The accepted kind of female rock musicians look like Hollywood starlets - think Gwen Stefani, for instance - now there is also the look gritty in 3000 dollar jeans look. Love conquered and addressed this with a kind of whorish child image (Kinderwhore as it was termed) - too small dresses, ripped panty hose, mis-applied make up, turned in feet. She looked like a 3 year old who had gotten into mummy's drawers but acted like a male rock star - maybe she was just drug fucked and it wasn't intentional at all - though much of Love's antics did seem intentional.

She held her guitar like it was her penis - that is she held her guitar like male rock stars hold a guitar. She totally eclipsed her male co-writer Eric Erlanderson in presence and voice. I remember her saying once, to explain her behaviour that her gynecologist diagnosed her as having too much testosterone. Granted - that's how she acted it's just that she was held more accountable than her male co-horts. The one big difference between her and any male rock musician out there was that she wasn't afraid to be political when it came to gender.

Hole's first LP Pretty On the Inside was IMO loud, messy, confronting and brilliant. Kim Gordon produced it and I have a hell of a lot of time for Kim Gordon. Then she took up with Kurt and was accused of stealing Kurt's music to write the album Live Through This. Again, another confronting and brilliant album (no matter who wrote it). Post-Kurt, Hole was busy on the touring bandwagon etc, and so they released My Body, The Hand Grenade a collection of b-sides, covers and rare tracks - eclectic and enjoyable (also The First Session and Ask For It). Then she took up with Billy Pumpkin (again) and was accused of not writing her album Celebrity Skin. Personally I think if you don't want to be accused of writing an album then this would be a good one to be accused of not writing, Billy is credited on many tracks but except for a few great songs, it's a stinker. Then there are her solo efforts. I can't say I've bothered with them. I've been disappointed with her for a while. What can I say? I miss the volatile mess.

She's been linked with people like Michael Stipe, Billy Corgan, Evan Dando, Alex Cox, Edward Norton, Evan Dando, Trent Reznor, Rodney Bottum, Kim Gordon, Jennifer Finch, Kat Bjelland. Some of those people *hate* her with a passion some of them will defend her forever. There must be something about her, eh?

Currently she has botoxed and lip suctioned her way into oblivion. She's been trying on that conforming cloak again but it's not working - she is now absolutely the kind of mess that isn't going to work at all. It's a different kind of mess to the one she started out with. It's like she has no idea who she is anymore. Or maybe I have no idea - in any case - I can't connect. Lots of people hate her but I don't. I can't say I enjoy her current musical flavour though but once upon a time she was really exciting. It's hard to believe now, I know, but I guess you just had to be there.

Teenage Whore - Hole



Violet - Hole



20 Years in the Dakota - Hole

click for song

Drown Soda - Hole

Click for song

Labels: fear, femininity, messy women, musical monday, Yoko woman

posted by M at 1:41 pm 24 comments