OWL responds to 'Man Show' flyers

Sexy. Powerful. Strong. These are typically masculine adjectives, but they should not be. They should be gender neutral, immediately masculine or feminine, and it is with this goal in mind that the Organization of Women Leaders has launched it's "what is a feminist?" campaign. Posters asking whether you can be an athlete, a man, a CEO, in the army, a model, etc. and still be a feminist are attempting to convey the message that anyone can be a feminist and embody may feminist ideals.

The Hooters campaign, rather than being based on shock value or an attempt to say that women can merely be sexy, is a statement against the objectification of women. We are reclaiming the "hooters" symbol, declaring that women can be sexy without being sex objects. We are imploring women to feel empowered, to own their feminism and own their bodies. The Man Show posters — rather than innocently playing on shock value — are in opposition to everything that OWL and the Hooters campaign stands for. It is essentially a campaign founded on the objectification of women, equating female sex or sexiness with male entertainment. The foundation of a "Man Show" on principles of female subjectification is offensive to both the men and women of Princeton. Rather than evoking images of a musical talent common to both men and women, they bring to mind seedy images of men ogling women in strip clubs.

The equation of manliness with female objectification is not only offensive, it is dangerous in this Princeton community which is already so plagued with problems of sexual inequality, from astonishingly low numbers of tenured female faculty to prevalent sexual aggression. In addition to addressing such tangible problems as these, the feminists of Princeton are constantly working against the stereotype of the "old boys club." This is an attitude inherited from the days before Princeton's co-education, the days in which women were bussed in to campus to visit the boys for the weekend. The mindset that justifies empowered, intelligent men using women for weekend entertainment, rather than co-existing with them equally on a daily basis, is the very mindset which hinders Princeton's progression towards equality in such basic areas as tenure or sex at the street. The "Man Show" campaign seems to be based on a mindset that many Princeton men no longer embody, a mindset which refuses to see half of the campus as equals — equals in terms of intelligence, power, and ability.

Princeton women have the unique power of choice and opportunity, the gift of the radicals of our mother's generation and the result of the fact that Princeton women, in order to get here, have assumed themselves to be on par with men in all areas. It follows that women should unquestionably have sexual freedom on par with men's. A woman's choice to embrace her sexuality should not place her in an automatic position of ojectification. Revealing bathing suits, short skirts, tight shirts and a woman's sense of her own sexiness should empower her rather than subordinating her to male power. Unless we embrace the diversity of sexiness, embrace the diversity of feminism, work to transform popular perceptions of women and challenge the popular conventions of women's roles, we are sacrificing our power of choice. Feminism is choice. Femininity is individual. Power should be gender neutral. Women can be both sexy and powerful, but this can only happen when both men and women decide to separate sexual objectification from sexy, entertainment from inequality. Nancy Ippolito is an English major from Dallas, Tex. She can be reached at ippolito@princeton.edu.