misogyny on the radio: the kyle sandilands episode

Warning: The following post contains explicit quoted material that may offend.

Late last week Kyle Sandilands, a well-known Australian breakfast radio host, made headlines all over the country.

In response to a news article by a female journalist about the unpopularity of his new television show, Sandilands launched into an on-air rant:

Some fat slag on news.com.au has already branded it a disaster. You can tell by reading the article that she just hates us and has always hated us …

… What a fat bitter thing you are. You’re deputy editor of an online thing. You’ve got a nothing job anyway. You’re a piece of shit …

… This low thing, Alison Stephenson, deputy editor of news.com.au online. You’re supposed to be impartial, you little troll …

… You’re a bullshit artist, girl. You should be fired from your job. Your hair’s very ’90s. And your blouse. You haven’t got that much titty to be having that low cut a blouse. Watch your mouth or I’ll hunt you down.

Within days 20,000 people had signed an online petition calling for sponsors of Sandilands’ radio show, and also the radio network on which it appears, to drop their support. So far at least 16 sponsors have pulled out in varying capacities.

Much has been said about this event in opinion columns throughout the weekend, so I will not add to the cacophony.

What I do wish to add however is some thoughts about the underlying misogyny reflected in Sandilands’ comments.

I made note of Sandilands’ misogyny on my social networks early on when this story first broke last week. A few people responded to such comments claiming that Sandilands was not, in fact, a misogynist* since he has previously launched similar on-air tirades against men.

But the nature of Sandilands’ above comments goes beyond simple anger or offence. Previous anger levelled against men by Sandilands has not ventured into the realm of sustained ridicule regarding physical appearance.

In reality misogyny is not simply about verbally assaulting women more often than men (nor is equality about dishing it out evenly).

Misogyny is literally (and obviously) about hating women. So does Sandilands hate women? Certainly his comments reflect some form of hatred against women. Allow me to explain.

Sandilands’ stated disgust at Stephenson’s shape, hair and breasts implies an objectifying view of women, one steeped in the perspective of magazine covers. Her figure is not like that of a one-in-a-billion supermodel, her hair is not styled according to the most up-to-date fashion, her breasts are not large enough. (I do not even know if these things are true since I do not know what Stephenson looks like, but this is irrelevant.)

The problem of course is that magazine pictures are not real; they present not reality but falsity. Still, Sandilands is implying that women should look something like those Photoshopped wonders.

Is it not the case that to insist upon women matching up to this impossible falsity is to hate what women truly are in reality? Isn’t this precisely the essence of misogyny; to implicitly desire an imagined form while expressing disgust at real female-ness?

Shouldn’t we collectively assert that this has no place in the public sphere?

In addition it was pointed out to me by a friend that Sandilands’ comments about Stephenson’s appearance are completely irrelevant to her competence in her job. Instead she is objectified and sexualised in order to humiliate her. As my friend aptly argued, “No woman in the world is under any obligation to be what turns (Sandilands) on just to get his approval.”

Sandilands is certainly not alone in such attitudes. I very much doubt he consciously sets out to propagate misogyny, though there is an underlying attitude to women that deems them somehow inferior, somehow deserving of sexual objectification and a more humiliating standard of achievement than men.

Even many women acquiesce in these attitudes; the objectification of women is so potent and enculturated that Kyle Sandilands’ female co-host Jackie O can simply giggle along with his misogynistic rantings without protest.

Certainly out contemporary entertainment industry colludes in such attitudes. Even in Christian subcultural expressions of entertainment (think worship music etc.) it appears that attractive women have a better chance of “success”. Why is that?

The Bible is often thought to have misogynistic elements, particularly in regard to silencing women. The meanings of such passages are disputed and will continue to be so.

What is certain is that New Testament theology affirms the breaking down of barriers between men and women:

There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3)

(Perhaps the disputed passages should be read in light of this ethic.)

I wonder how different traditions and groups within Christianity actually reflect and embody this ethic…

I would love to hear from you on this complex issue, particularly women who can reflect about their experiences of misogyny – what can/should men do to bring dignity to women in all spheres?


* It should be noted that misogyny does not only denote hatred of all women; it can also denote the hatred of women who do not fall into certain categories.

Posted on November 28, 2011, in Current Events, Sexuality & Gender and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. I think searching the Bible for a cases in favour of gender equality is a useless pursuit, which I know is offensive to much of your readership Matt. But one verse you’ve used is dwarfed amongst hundreds of thousands of verses that say the opposite, and is what our society has been built on since the conception of the Bible, leading us to our current day situation.

    But, in answer to your question, the best thing men can do to bring dignity to women is work on their own self esteem so they can value themselves and others, including women.

    In return, women should view any acts of misogyny or sexism as merely an expression of weakness from the perpetrator and shouldn’t give it any value. Men should realise that they are the fool when they fail to notice the merits of women outside their physical appearance.

    Above all though, for women expect the change to come from the men, is putting the power in the hands of the perpetrators, just reenforcing their original premise that their flawed opinion matters.

    Women can celebrate the opinions that reenforce their own belief in their self-worth, and disregard those that contradict it, but under no circumstances should they stand on either viewpoint alone, but sadly that is far too often the case.

  2. did you buy Ralph just so you could take that photo?

  3. I think its indicative of the current media trends in general. Though its one step further than the gossip segments in the morning TV shows. Kyle has built his reputation as a shock jock and I wonder if he is showing an on air persona – much like the late Stan Stazamic did?

    I’m also noticing a trend towards misogyny within the advertising media. Where in general men are portrayed as a form of Neanderthal, socially inept, or having a form of low IQ in which women pull the wool over their eyes – I think if the advertisers reversed the genders within those adds they wouldn’t be received as well.

    What this latest incident has proven however is that society in general knows when the line has been crossed and it shows the power of the consumer.

  4. P.s. I should of said ‘Misandry’ is my second paragraph and not ‘Misogyny.’

Leave a Response

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: