The subtitle reads ‘a mag for fresh teenagers’… (The title can be translated as ‘shit from the homeland’.) I believe there’s only been one issue. It was edited by two young women from Overpelt, inspired by the ‘Pelter’ (Overpelt & Neerpelt, in the north-east corner of Belgian Limburg) zine-scene: Ann (‘Fe@n’) & Hilde (‘@lf’). Ann Hendriks is now living in my town and donated her zine-collection…
Their intention was to stimulate other women to get involved and active. The content: an ode to feminism, an introduction to anarchism, a piece on the female in mass-media (I’m re-publshing that below because it gives insight in how some young women in the early 80s punk-scene did have a clue about feminism), a rant on indifference, info on animal-rights/vegetarianism, cartoons, etc.
Everyone in our neighbourhood did a zine around that time. We encouraged each other. And all of a sudden some girls popped up! Schools became ‘mixed’ and A.H. was walking by with a schoobag with loads of band-names on it. So I addressed her and proposed to drop by with her girlfriends at the house (the ‘Meinhofpub’) of our mate Axel (Lastig zine). Then we asked them if they wanted to do a fanzine or a band as well, or at least become active… That’s how S.D.V. came about…
Stefan Joosten (‘A-Strant’/ ‘Dawn Of Liberty’ vocalist, and various zines)
WOMEN IN MASS MEDIA
I’ve just been watching TV: Knight Rider (or something like that); the eternal crap of a tough, handsome (?) stud with a lot of body-hair, who just had a face-lift and who’s going to save the pretty, stupid blonde with a unimportant supporting role. One can predict in advance what is going to happen: the “retarded” chicks always “get themselves in trouble” and the macho-dudes will save them with their “intelligence”. And then that sexist drivel by Benny Hill [UK ‘comedian’]. What a load of crap!!! The only thing they do is having a couple of flipped out chicks run around naked (or almost). Here the woman clearly serves as an object for lust and pleasure for the man: preparing food, cleaning, giving birth, …
Children have been spoonfed these role-patterns from a very early age, later it will go down ever so easily. Emphasizing the classic role-patterns happens everywhere: press, media, church, home, school, professions, … Especially the man stands the firmest in that world because it’s controlled by men. The mass media are in many ways a reflection, a simplified representation of the distribution of power in the world; and in that world the access of women to a political and economic position is usually extremely limited, her position and her role are determined by political, economic and cultural systems that tend to exclude her from active participation. And since the mass media are institutions that promote a process of socialization within certain political and economic systems, they reinforce in the first place the views and the division of roles of a system designed by and for men.
The way women are generally represented in the media is very narrow-minded; in the movies, press and radio, the activities and interest of women don’t extend beyond the boundaries of home and family. She is presented as a dependent, romantic being. Also the professions in which most women can be found, are usually those with an overwhelming majority of women and otherwise in the lowest segments of a certain profession. It’s a fact that in all professional categories there’s a much higher percentage of men than women. Furthermore: the jobs for females are not only paid worse than those of the men, they’re also dead-ends: jobs without promotion opportunities (for those who’re ambitious).
Because of their sexuality and physical appearance, women are being exploited, used as bait for advertising products. The woman is pushed into a certain role: one that is determined by society. A role that has to appear seductive for men and women, and that could encourage women to buy certain products. These narrowminded views are mainly used in the advertising of cosmetics. First and foremost: I find cosmetics useless, because I think it serves nothing but to please the man, secondly it’s also being tested on animals! And thirdly: all that crap on your face is unhealthy. In advertising for cosmetics, the woman is abused in various ways (also: she lets her self being abused), she’s represented in an auto-erotic or narcissistic way (in pictures). This to show that she would also like to be beautiful.
On a second level she’s depicted as being very extroverted. She has to shine or glimmer modestly, in a way that the man can show her of as his “beautiful” property. Preferably the female body is also abused for the most idiotic photographs.
But women also contribute to allow the abuse: they let themselves be abused; e.g. in advertising, porn (sex-industry), movies, … She allows herself being imposed a role pattern through advertising (among other things) but in that way one gets a picture of a woman who agrees with that role, and when this is being generalized, then one is surprised that there’s also people who believe this is utter nonsense!!!!!
This whole system is based on role patterns, prejudices, hierarchy … We can only remedy this, in my view, by resisting all of this.
This was especially directed against machos (as you probably will have understood) and against men who think they can be despots. And of course against those stupid bimbos who support it and agree with everything. (Just think of those crazy chicks with that miserable Benny Hill.)
(I think you’ll have found that out by now, but just for the sake of clarity, huh.)