The Hand Mirror oppose both as forms of oppression against women. In the first one the woman is being "belittled", "denigrated", made the subject of "idiot chauvinism", in the second, the woman's clothing choice is "silly" and her "sexuality is being controlled by her father".
Now look at this image featured in the sidebar of the Hand Mirror:
My body, my choice. Really? I have frequently found left-wing feminists of the ilk at the Hand Mirror to be inconsistent in their application of their feminist mantras, condescending and paternalistic towards women of my ilk. They talk about women's empowerment, equality, the right of women to make their own choices about their sexuality, their bodies, their lives but that's all it is; talk.
In the first image, a woman made a decision to accept a modelling job which involved almost baring her breasts and they wrote her off as a victim of male oppression, ignorant about the realities of the world.
In the second image they blast another woman's choice to cover her breasts with a t-shirt that states the woman agrees with her family's morals. In the comments section, the same author from the first case identifies this image as "Fathers controlling their daughters' sexuality;" implicit from the title is the claim that this woman is "silly". I am confused. Can women not choose their own t-shirts and their own reasons as to why they do not want their breasts ogled?
In the same blog piece the author writes:
Perhaps you can help me choose which is worse - the t-shirt above or the one I can't get a shot of which said "No trespassing. I'm waiting for my husband."
Again the search for an oppressor is sent into full swing in response to a woman making a choice about when and who she wants to have sex with.
Ironically, when Otago University's student rag, Critic, published unwanted comments about my breasts [link is to just one example], denigrated my appearance, etc because I was right-wing, some of the very same Hand Mirror feminists who were witness to this at the time said....
Funny. When a woman freely chooses what she does with her body, but her reasons are "wrong" [read: incompatible with left-wing feminist theory] she is oppressed, naive about life, silly, cannot think for herself and is obviously a pawn of male patriarchy. Yet, when a woman has no choice about her body being the subject of crass attention, but has the wrong politics, no "oppression" appears to be present- at least none worth boycotting or laying a formal complaint over.
Clearly feminists, like those at the Hand Mirror, rate their own politics higher than the women they talk about championing; they are more than happy to try to dictate and control what women choose to do with their bodies and will even turn a blind eye to actual cases of harassment, if it suits their political agenda.
As a disclaimer, I choose to not give my money to organisations that advertise like The Huntsman Steakhouse; also, I don't think that women should choose to accept modelling jobs like the one in question. I can make these statements consistently as I have never tried to make the claim that all choices women make are morally benign and I have never tried to defend the ludicrous claim that women can do whatever they like with their own bodies; I mean, I can't use my body to smash your head in now can I?