Wednesday, September 28, 2016
Nipple liberation
I’m wondering whether I should lend my support to the ‘Free the Nipple’ movement. In principle, I’m wholly in favour of liberating enslaved nipples so they can live their lives in comfort and dignity. However, the leader of the campaign is a young lady called Kendall Jenner, who appears to be completely out of her depth. When given the opportunity to speak out on the issue, she said.
“Lately, it's like I'm either braless or I have my bra out. I'm all about freeing the nipple.”
This was a very poor statement. She seems to think that allowing people to see the outline of her own nipples is the answer to everything. What about the average woman who has a regular job and is forced to keep her nipples under lock and key? The long campaign against slavery wasn’t won by Abraham Lincoln boasting about his own freedom and refusing to pick cotton. He had to fight a war and sign proclamations and do other stuff.
In my perplexity, I resorted to asking the manager of the safari camp what the Free Nipplers really wanted.
“They’re feminists,” he explained. “They want to have the right to drive men nuts by exposing their own nipples without letting anyone touch them.”
“But won’t men have the right to expose their nipples too?” I asked.
“Not the same thing,” he replied. “Our nipples aren’t as big and they don’t squirt milk. No one cares if they are visible.”
“Well, maybe you should pretend you don’t care about seeing a woman’s nipples,” I suggested.
“I could pretend, but my eyes would give the game away,” he said. “They’re like smart cameras programmed to zoom in on them.”
I thanked the manager for his opinion, but I don’t believe he speaks for most men. He must have some kind of udder fixation that makes him unusually agitated in the presence of a female nipple. Perhaps he was suckled by an enormous wet nurse when he was a baby. What I don’t understand is why this campaign is viewed as a feminist issue. The Suffragettes never demanded the right to expose their nipples or wear wet t-shirts. The cause of nipple freedom may be just, but it won’t be helped by making bogus assertions.
If the Free Nipplers want to be taken seriously, the first thing they should do is fire Kendall Jenner as their spokesperson. Although she’s a comely lass with decent nipples, she clearly isn’t up to the job of leading a mass movement. The next step would be to broaden their campaign to include a full range of nipple rights for all mammals. Dairy cows, for example, are compelled to have their udders sucked dry by ugly pumping machines. This is a far graver injustice than suffered by human females. Lastly, they should stop trying to humiliate men by implying that the male nipple is irrelevant. You can’t demand rights for yourself while acting as if others don’t matter.
Labels: feminism, Kendall Jenner, nipple rights
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
What Kim Kardasdian wants
I have been forced, much against my better judgement, to find out who Kim Kardashian is. The manager of the safari camp is to blame for showing me a newspaper article about her, in which she was quoted as saying that she’d like to be a man so she could have sex with herself:
“I just want to know what it would feel like,” she mused.
“That doesn’t make sense,” I said to the manager. “If she were a man, the person she’d be having sex with would be someone else. You can’t be two people at the same time.”
The manager ignored my point of logic and said: “If she wants to know what it feels like to screw herself, she should stick her leg inside a stocking that’s three sizes too big. That should give her a pretty good idea.”
“Is that so?” I replied. “As a gorilla who used to wear pantaloons in the circus, I’m glad that that analogy never occurred to me.”
“That’s because you don’t have my imagination,” said the manager, before slinking off with a smirk on his face.
This exchange prompted me to do my own research on Miss Kardashian. The first thing I learned was that she’s one of those celebrities who shot to fame for reasons that were quickly forgotten. There is nothing in the documentary record to indicate that she practised a profession or performed notable deeds. Maybe her winning smile won her acclaim… or something. As for the manager’s coochie comparison, I couldn’t find anything definitive, but his conjecture was far from implausible. The bounciest trampoline will lose its spring if it’s jumped on too frequently.
Will Kim go down in history as the vacuous bimbo who said “OK” when people told her to go and fuck herself? She might yet avoid this ignoble fate by championing a worthy cause, such as the nipple rights of women in North Carolina. The state legislature in that benighted corner of the Confederacy is toying with the idea of making it a felony for women to expose the tips of their titties. This flagrant violation of the First Amendment is a devilish provocation, no less execrable than the attack on Fort Sumter.
What Kim should do is give the first lady a call and organise a million-nipple march right through the heart of the rebel state, in the manner of the late General Sherman. On second thoughts make that a two-million nipple march – let’s keep the numbers round. She could then make a name for herself by leading bare-breasted cavalry charges against recalcitrant rednecks determined to keep the nipple in bondage.
As a gesture of goodwill to their enslaved southern sisters, lactating ladies in the liberating army could suckle hungry babies on their route to the state capital. This is what Salma Hayek did on a recent visit to Africa and it made her more popular than Bono and Geldorf. (And almost as popular as Ermintrude the dairy cow.)
Labels: breast-feeding, Kim Kardashian, nipple rights, Salma Hayek, sex change
