Girlie pin-ups debated

Press, 12 May 1984, Page 1

Girlie pin-ups debated

By

MICHAEL HANNAH

in Wellington

“Girlie” pin-ups and calendars have been included in the Federation of Labour’s definition of sexual harassment. The move was endorsed by the F.O.L.’s annual conference yesterday after a heated debate and a vote in which many delegates abstained. By a card vote of 205 to 185, the conference adopted a resolution that an addition be made to the F.O.L.’s definition of sexual harassment that included “the display of pornographic pictures in a workplace, for example ‘girlie’ pin-ups, calendars etc, or other material which degrades women in particular.” Delegates clashed over the right to stick “girlie” pin-ups on workplace walls, with views ranging from a

woman delegate, who related pornography to rape, to a man delegate who said it was “one of life’s pleasures for an ageing man” to look at “girlie” posters. Some delegates objected to the resolution on the grounds that it would require them, as union officials, to tear down posters from many workplace walls, and that the resolution should equally apply to pin-ups of male nudes. The mover of the remit, the federation’s vice-presi-dent, Ms Sonia Davies, sought to allay union officials’ fears, and told them the resolution would not require any affiliate to do anything, but it would encourage them to educate other union members, she believed.

The Carpenters’ Union gave notice after the vote that it had abstained from voting because its delegates could not reach unanimity on the issue. They proposed to raise it for discussion at their annual conference. Many other delegates also refrained from raising their cards in the vote. Ms Davies said that there had been division in the remit committee which had proposed the resolution. She was supported in the debate by a Clerical Workers’ delegate, Ms Martha Colman, who argued that pornography was the “ideal” of a society which condoned rape, women-battering and other crimes against women. Pornography presented a false image of women enjoying being bound, gagged, mutilated, and raped, she said. The immediate victims of pornography were usually women and children of

the working class, many of whom were forced into prostitution and pornographic modelling. Although some people might draw a distinction between this and so-called “soft-core porn,” such as “girlie” magazines, it was clear that pornography presented women as objects for the sexual gratification of men, she said. Ms Colman said that pornography was a flourishing industry in New Zealand, with “snuff” movies being shown in a number of towns. Mr B. Fowler, of the Northern Storemen and Packers’ Union, supported the remit also, arguing that any propaganda material which degraded women was not a women’s issue, but a working class, trade union issue. “If it’s anti-women, it’s anti-workers,” he said. Opposition, however, came from another member of the remit committee, Mr J. W. Butterworth, who said

he would have been “extremely hypocritical” to have supported the resolution. “I don’t think there’s anything wrong in looking at ‘girlie’ pin-ups,” he told the conference. “It’s one of life’s pleasures for an ageing man.” Mr Butterworth asserted that the majority of males tended to be voyeurs while the majority of women tended to be exhibitionists. The remit was a “brash” attempt to impose a standard on union members, it was a form of censorship and outside the terms of reference of union officials. After the vote was taken, the federation’s president, Mr W. J. Knox, remarked, “If there are any bones left in Fintan Patrick Walsh (a former F.O.L. president) they’d be rattling in his box.” Mr Knox however, later praised the women delegates at the conference for their participation, and urged that the F.O.L. not become divided between men and women.