Seriously.

Your questions are quite obviously an attempt to provoke me into identifying the weedwomyn image as part of a greater structure of power relations. However by imposing a feminist reductionist model of power relations onto the weedwomyn image you automatically ascribe the weedwomyn as the victim of patriarchal relations.

I think there is a structural logic in capitalism that tries to colonise womens and mens bodies, no doubt about it. Images of women in bikinis are no doubt often a part of it. As are images of Daniel Carter in his underwear etc.

Of course I don't think men are objectified in the same way as women. Nor do I think non-white women are objectified in the same way as white women.

However your logic implies that the objectification of women is somehow separate and unique (and thus privileged) from other forms objectification that stems from capitalist social relations. I don't think the objectification of women's bodies is a more priviledged form of oppression than the objectification of men's bodies and thus is not sexist as such!

I don't think there are significantly more (numerically) images that objectify women than men in this society. Images of male bodies objectify them in vastly different ways. Rugby jerseys rather than swimsuits?

There is nothing in the indymedia editorial policy that mentions removing objectifying images (nor should there be!), and I disagree the image is sexist as it could equally have been a man in his speedos on the billboard being objectified.

Grace- There are also hundreds of images men see every day instructing them how to be a good object for women to look at!!!

For goodness sake female oppression under capitalism should not be privileged above other forms as you and many others appear to do. The use of a moralistic "I am offended" is not a valid argument for censorship. Why? Because Being Offended does not equal Being Oppressed.

I hate sexism as much as the next anarcho-feminist. However I don't think that the following equation is sexist:

"image of perfect body" = "imposes hegemonic ideal of perfect body" = "oppreses the viewer of that image as they try to live up to its ideal".

This equation oppresses all of us, men and women!

re: "the gendered nature of bodies, and the power imbalances involved in that", I don't see your point?