31 Responses to “Girls Say Yes”

• karen p. r. responded:
  

  good work, lovely ladies!
  love forever,
  karen

• Dorothee responded:
  

  Love it!!

• A.B. responded:
  

  for a bigger version: http://prairial.blogspot.com/2008/10/spread-word.html

  WE

• A.B. responded:
  

  Meant to say “we love bust!!!”

• J-Lew responded:
  

  Yeah girls! I want to shove this places.

• erinn p. responded:
  

  fantastic! i love intelligent women :)

• Rach responded:
  

  WHAT!? How is this a ‘good for them’ moment? I’m really appalled by this approach. Withholding or offering sex is not a progressive way to advance any woman’s political agenda. I support Obama but I am disgusted by an ad like this. I thought BUST was supposed to be some shell of feminism

• Marcie responded:
  

  From a woman who is Joan Baez’s age, way to go ladies!

• A.B. responded:
  

  Re: Rach,

  “Girls Say Yes” does not need to translate immediately into sex; it’s rather meant as a positive (and tongue-in-cheek) affirmation of young voters that plays off the Baez poster from the anti-war movement of the 60s. And it’s not as if the girls in the photo are in PETA-like sexed up positions. They’re just sitting on a couch looking pissed!

  BUST certainly is a feminist medium, and I think this photo fits very well into the BUST-y take that feminists can be funny and playful. The poster is meant to be fun- nothing more.

• Rach responded:
  

  I understand how it could have been made for fun but I still feel that the suggestion that girls affections are awarded to boys on the basis of political allegiance is a bit retrogressive. It does suggest that girls’ attention is a tool to get what they want. I’m looking at this from a couple of angles and still feel put out by it. I’m finding it very hard to see the positive in this

• OK responded:
  

  Another reason why OBAMA IS A BAD CHOICE..

• victoria responded:
  

  No. No. No.

  In its original context, the original poster was edgy and effective. Not only was it a time of opposition to war, it was also a time of increasing awareness and acceptance of the sexual agency of women. The original poster pushed boundaries in that regard.

  The current poster can be interpreted to say we’ve not really made much progress since that time. It’s no longer cutting edge nor humorous for a few white hetero girls to attempt a political act by merely sitting and looking pretty for boys. Yeah, it’s fun to do a retro photo shoot, but let’s not forget that some things should stay in the past, like heterosexism and white privilege.

• Steph responded:
  

  I agree with Rach and Victoria. It IS about context, and with the original image being from a time of new sexual freedom for the females, and the current image being during a time of, well, now where sexuality is all messed up.

  things being in “good fun” doesn’t mean anything. “good fun” has been used to justify a whole lotta crap.

  Personally, I like the image. I like the words along the bottom. But I don’t like the top words with their implication that women are prizes for men for making the right choice in the two party presidential system. i know you can’t address everything in a still image, but you’ve got sexism, binary sex roles, some assumption of straightness … a whole bunch of played out stuff.

• Paula Cohen Martin responded:
  

  In context of the original it is PERFECT. It’s unfortunate that we live in a cultural vaccuum where today’s women haven’t seen the original image, have no clue who Joan B or Mimi Farina were. I think it’s fun and clever. And OBAMA is the ONLY CHOICE for thinking women and men everywhere.

• Stephanie Huffman responded:
  

  Can I get this poster somewhere?

• D responded:
  

  uuuhh, Rach? Girls’ attention, in pure point of fact, is a tool to get what they want. Plus, they’re women. Girls is a little retrogressive, isn’t it?

• Audra responded:
  

  The poster is clever and funny, and these women used their creativity, wit, their voices (and their gams) for the good guy. That’s fantastic. Rach, do you seriously think that a guy is going to see this and think that they are proffering sex in exchange for a vote? It’s called irony. You’re “appalled?” Really? I’m appalled too– at Darfur, at Africans dying of AIDS because they can’t afford medicine that costs a penny, and most of all at the prospect of another Replublican administration, following what is possibly the single worst American presidency in our history. I think your easily offended sensibilites might be better put to use elsewhere.

• Evo responded:
  

  Great. Even “feminist” publications sell women out. I’m so (not) shocked. Fuck you, Bust.

• Betty Bonz responded:
  

  Yuck. Don’t kid yourselves.

• JJ responded:
  

  Way to go, ladies! And let’s be real here. Sara Palin has done for women what Fravor Flav has done for black people. Let’s hope after this election we NEVER hear from her again.

• pl responded:
  

  i think this picture is great. but even if you don’t think it’s great, can’t you find a better way of asserting that than going to the extreme of calling it “retrogressive” or “selling women out”?

  give me a break. if feminism means anything, it means that when women use their sexuality in a manner of their own choosing, that we don’t respond by declaring them to be “retrogressive.”

  some of the posters call themselves “feminists” but in fact are “christian moralists.” they want to turn back the clock on sexual liberation. and they want women to feel ashamed of their own sexuality.

  what the hell kind of feminism is that?

• Jen responded:
  

  I’m really offended by this ad. I’m all for being flirty and sexual but this isn’t feminism. It’s simply another tired hyper-sexualized message that demeans women. So what if a man votes for Obama? That isn’t enough to get him into my bed.

  This poster blatantly plays off stereotypical gender roles. If a guy does the bare minimum to qualify for “nice guy” then women will role over and spread her legs. This is like giving a man a cookie for not being a rapist.

  There is also an underlying message that all women are attracted to men. Do the makers of this ad expect lesbians to get on their knees for men? Are all of us bi women supposed to leave our girlfriends and fuck Obama voting men?

  Last time I checked feminism was about equity and equality for all, not blatant exploitation of women and heterosexism.

  I’m encouraged by the makers’ call to action but incredibly disappointed with their delivery.

• Bobby responded:
  

  Everybody knows what girls know (not much)… The real question… What would a woman say?

  But hey let’s put a dork in the White House. He can probably learn the job in four years. Course, you’ll be toast. Girls said yes to Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Hitler too… To name just a few social engineers. But, women know better.

• Eduardo responded:
  

  The poster’s bottom line (against Governor Sarah Palin) betrays the true message… It’s not that we’re for Barak Obama, it’s just that girls are afraid of women. And, Sarah Palin is a woman. Big time.

  No one needs to know who Joan Baez was. She was irrelevant then and is more so now. The old-school ’60s feminists were all about creating a third sex… The feminist. And they set things back. Sarah Palin is all woman and certainly more man than Barak Obama.

  So, the poster asks: Want to get laid? And replies: Then be a girl and support an ignorant smooth talking suit while putting a real woman down. We don’t like reality and want to surrender or lives to the government. Please don’t make us think or opine outside of the context of late-night cable satire. We can’t take the truth and want to laugh all night… Hey, Clinton-envy is alive-and-well after all. Ignorance is bliss.

• boodgieman responded:
  

  The Sixties sure aren’t what they used to be.

• Flossie responded:
  

  oh sorry, should it have said “Girls say yes to girls…” would that be more “…(fill in the blank)…?” puh-leeze. stop taking yourselves so seriously. and Sarah Palin being more man than Barack Obama? How on earth do you back that up in terms of her being a woman “big time?” more “woman” = closer to a man? is that it?

• steph responded:
  

  a feminist telling folks that they shouldn’t take things seriously? come on, now. should we just shrug it off like all the oblivious things people spew? maybe we should all be b.f.f.s with everyone and never get mad about anything.

• Big Bill responded:
  

  Please. I am offended. The cutesy assumption that a man would prostitute his vote for sex with these girls is stomach turning. Just look at them! I wouldn’t let my dog have sex with them! And the assumption that men are so hard up that we would waste a vote to get some sack time with these twits is offensive. Maybe some horny, hairy hard-up leftist college boy, but not most men.

• frede responded:
  

  i don’t suppose anyone bothered to consider the b.s. aspect of an ad like this, women aren’t really going to sleep with or even date a guy just how he votes, stereotypical teasing is what it is. men might lie to get sex but how is it any better that women will lie about giving sex?

• NLM responded:
  

  “Big Bill”: trust me, you don’t speak for me or most men. While I’m a center-left male, I absolutely find those girls in the poster quite fetching. A bit chilly, maybe, but definitely attractive.

  (By the way, I still haven’t figured out what all these humorless right-wing Christian nutjobs are doing on a Bust magazine blog. Can anyone explain this?)

• jenni byers responded:
  

  Followers.