Boobquake: good or bad?

Posted on by
3

This is the first time I really get what it means to “go viral.”

I know this is my third blog in a row about breasts, so I’ll try to be brief.

Most of you know the story: A muslim cleric, Kazem Sedighi, was quoted in the Chicago Tribune: “Many women who do not dress modestly, lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes.”

www.thesexist.com 

Purdue student, Jen McCreight, challenged the cleric on her blog and a Facebook page encouraging women to show some cleavage Monday, April 26 and see if they could incite an earthquake. The idea obviously is to challenge a culture that oppresses female sexuality.

CBS news reports 80,000 women have signed up for Boobquake. Though The Sexist reports so far there’s more media coverage than actual participants at Boobquake events.

McCreight writes she never expected her joke to get so much attention and that if she’d known, she would’ve been more careful about wording and execution.

So the question is obviously whether or not it’s empowering for women to bare breasts to humiliate the cleric, not only offending him with immodesty but also proving how ridiculous his claims are. Do these acts in fact challenge a sexist culture or is Boobquake instead capitulating to it, exploiting women’s bodies with a voluntary sex show? It’s the same endlessly debated question of third and fourth wave feminism: is it empowering to express your sexuality when it involves ‘traditionally’ feminine accouterments such as high heels and clinging clothing?

It can go either way.

Certainly expressing sexuality shouldn’t be at odds with attaining other kinds of power, as second wave feminism was interpreted by many. If you were serious about the movement, supposedly you couldn’t shave your legs or wear lipstick. (I imagine that’s all exaggerated; I know bras were never burned, but certainly just the reputation of stodgy feminists was enough to scare many women away from joining “women’s libbers”.) The challenge remains today that it can be difficult for women to express sexuality and simultaneously keep control of it, still living in a culture where men as a group are the ones in power.

Years ago, I started a “Team Pussy” movement, or tried to, before Facebook and Twitter, with an article I wrote for Salon, and then a site I started, and some T-shirts. I hoped to transform the word “pussy” from an insult into a compliment, meaning the person referred to as a “pussy” was not wimpy, but brave or cool. Ten years earlier, with many less resources than it has today, the male dominated internet managed to co-opt my attempt to some degree, linking my Salon piece to hundreds of porn sites.

And I’ve got to wonder: what would it mean if the breast baring does actually bring on an earthquake? I guess the cleric would be proved right, but it would be kind of a cool testament to female power. Not a big, long earthquake, nothing that hurt anyone, just a quickie.

I guess no one knows what will come of Boobquake yet. The only thing evident so far is that women are smarter than men. If men were more intelligent, they would’ve thought this up years ago. Or maybe they did. If we see the cleric at the Make Out Room tonight, we’ll know for sure. Here’s some info on the festivities taking place there tonight, one of, apparently many, local Boobquake events in SF:

Monday 4/26: Ladies, participate in a global experiment you’ll surely tell your grandchildren about some day: Boobquake! The brainchild of blogger, Jen McCreight, Boobquake aims to disprove an Iranian prayer leader’s recent assertion that immodesty causes earthquakes. Then, get your decolletage down to The Makeout Room for a mod edition of Cat’s Pajamas, an evening of music and dance hosted by Ginger of Whore Magazine. 21+, $5, 8pm @ 3225 22nd Street.

Best breasts get best roles in Hollywood

Posted on by
1

At first, it seems like just good news. Sunday’s New York Times reports that actresses with too much plastic surgery are losing parts in favor of more natural looking women.

In small but significant numbers, filmmakers and casting executives are beginning to re-examine Hollywood’s attitude toward breast implants, Botox, collagen-injected lips and all manner of plastic surgery.

Television executives at Fox Broadcasting, for example, say they have begun recruiting more natural looking actors from Australia and Britain because the amply endowed, freakishly young-looking crowd that shows up for auditions in Los Angeles suffers from too much sameness.”I think everyone either looks like a drag queen or a stripper,” said Marcia Shulman, who oversees casting for Fox’s scripted shows…

…Moviemakers prefer actresses with natural breasts for costume dramas and period films. So much so that when the Walt Disney Company recently advertised for extras for the new “Pirates” film, the casting call specified that only women with real breasts need apply. “

Without a doubt, it’s better for women if Hollywood is truly trending natural as opposed to favoring and rewarding rewarding pastic surgery victims like 23 year old Frankenwoman Heidi Montag (who was widely reported to have had 10 procedures in one day.)

But still, there’s something smug and disturbing about this NY Times article and the Hollywood casting agents quoted in it. Actresses are being advertised for and then cast based on their breasts. No one mentions that the underlying, unfortunate issue here isn’t really what kind of breasts happen to be stylish, fake or natural (and I’m not sure “costume” dramas and period pieces qualify as “in”), but Hollywood’s unrelenting focus on female body parts. Movies are a visual form, of course looks matter. But the literal dissection, “trendiness,” and evaluation of women’s bodies is unsettling. Whatever happened to talent?

Fat girls wear bras too!

Posted on by
1

When plus size company Lane Bryant’s sexy TV ad was supposedly censored by ABC as inappropriate for “Dancing With the Stars” audiences, there were calls of hypocrisy. After all, TV networks don’t seem to have an issue showing lingerie ads for Victoria’s Secret (or even the much touted half naked extravaganza ‘Victoria’s Secret Special.”) Still, TV executives seemed to feel that fat girls shouldn’t show cleavage. Ironic, since big girls are more likely to have big breasts, but I guess natural is what’s offensive here.

Lane Bryant TV commercialABC is now denying it ever censored the ad. Lane Bryant still claims the ad was censored. Either way, I’m having trouble leaping on the feminist band wagon burning up the blogosphere defending this commercial and demanding it be aired. Fat women should be allowed to be objectified too, dammit! 

I had the same negative reaction when Mo’Nique hosted a fat girl beauty contest for TV. I didn’t think it was so awesome that large women were gaining entry into the world of the skinny, finally allowed to compete against each other so a panel of judges could decide who was the prettiest.

I was also bummed when “High School Musical” featured a fat cheerleader and everyone called that progressive and “so PC.” Cheerleaders are just bad for women. I don’t care if they’re fat or of color or have athletic skill. Being a cheerleader is the definition of being the sideshow, her role is to make the main event look good; she is not and never will be the star. Cheerleader obsession is like teen training ground for the perfect heterosexual relationship; it’s like wife school. The hot girl cheers on her talented guy, standing by her quarterback, loyally, faithfully, whether he wins or loses; her admiration is constant and her love is true.

www.salon.com 

Another recent example of fake feminist progress is Angelina Jolie’s much touted role Salt, originally written “for a guy,” a guy like Tom Cruise! Scott Mendelson wrote about EW’s self congratulatory cover story on how progressive the movie is on his blog. Mendelson has this quote from EW:

“In the original script, there was a huge sequence where Edwin Salt (the original male protagonist) saves his wife, who’s in danger,” says Noyce. “And what we found in the new script, it seemed to castrate his character a little. So we had to change the nature of that relationship.”

Mendelson writes:

So, hidden in an article on how “Salt” is oh-so-empowering for female action heroes is this tidbit. The filmmakers believe that it was perfectly OK for the spouse to be rescued from mortal danger if said love interest was a girl, but not if the romantic partner was a man. Apparently, it’s great if the action hero is a girl, as long as she doesn’t have the opportunity to one-up any male counterparts or reverse the oldest cliche in the action-film handbook.

What a bummer. The supposedly feminist “Salt” remains safely within the gender boundaries of every classic Disney movie, and is it even possible to be “a little castrated?”

Update: Jezebel posts a leaked memo from ABC to Lane Bryant, showing that, contrary to its claims, the network did refuse to air the ad.

Second update: To the offended commenters, just like I tell my six year old, “fat” is not a bad word! Nor is “large” nor is “chubby.” People who are upset I used the word “fat” to describe the plus size model in the photo are reinforcing the values of a society that thinks one woman’s size is so preferable to another’s. And yes, of course size is relative, as is height, weight, age etc. Compared to certain groups of people, in various societies, the Lane Bryant model would not be fat or plus size.

Third update: Ashley Grant, the Lane Bryant model, says on ET she thinks her breasts were too big, bigger than the Victoria’s Secret models and that’s why her ad was censored.

I don’t watch “Dancing with the Stars” but seeing the clips on my TV right now, the costumes on those women look like my three year old got near them with her scissors; they’re missing whole sections.

While I was posting this story last night, Joy Behar was on TV with Pamela Anderson as a guest, showing clips of half dressed Pam doing splits, again and again, over her dance partner. If ABC censored big breasts during its cartoon hour, that would be one thing, but during “Dancing With the Stars” gives a whole new meaning to the term “double standard.”

Congresswomen introduce ‘Healthy Media for Youth Act’

Posted on by
2

Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) have introduced “the Healthy Media for Youth Act to “authorize grants to promote media literacy and youth empowerment programs, to authorize research on the role and impact of depictions of girls and women in the media, to provide for the establishment of a National Task Force on Girls and Women in the Media…”

Feministing.com reports:

The bill, which draws on research by Girls, Inc. and the Girls Scouts Research Institute, among others, focuses on the most harmful aspects of media, including unrealistic representations of female beauty, sexualized images of young girls and teens, and violence against women as entertainment.

The bill also mentions the Geena Davis Institute on Gender and Media:

The Geena Davis Institute on Gender in the Media found that the majority of female characters in children’s movies are praised for their appearance or physical beauty rather than their personality, intelligence, or other talents, and are often short-sighted and narrowly fixated on romantic relationships that lack substantial connections or courtships. Girls and boys watching children’s programming may vicariously learn that beauty is an essential part of being female and critical for gaining attention and acceptance.

The bill never mentions photoshopping. I don’t get why. It’s already illegal to lie in advertising, so why photoshopping is so prevalent and still permitted is beyond me. I guess it’s because photoshopping’s victims are primarily women, and probably those women are supposed to be grateful they get to eat an extra donut and save money on plastic surgery.

The bill does refer to ‘narrow and restrictive’ gender roles. What could be more narrowing than Filippa Hamilton’s story?

Hamilton is a 23 year old former Ralph Lauren model. She was horrified when she saw the photoshopped images in the ad pictured below right. You can see that the width of her hips is narrower than width of her head. The real 5’8 120 lb model is pictured on the left. Hamilton worked for Ralph Lauren since she was fifteen years old, but said the company fired her after telling her she could no longer fit into their clothing. Ralph Lauren claimed that they let her go “as a result of her inability to meet the obligations under her contract with us.” I wonder if those obligations included avoiding puberty?

www.posh24.com 

Thank Goodness there’s a brave model speaking out about what really happened to her. Often women are quiet because they’d prefer not to be called fat or ugly publicly or otherwise humiliated into silence. And it doesn’t make it easier to improve things when the US government has a congress that’s only 17% female, only seven female governors, and throughout our entire history, only three women who have ever held the office of Supreme Court Justice.

Thank you to Democrat Tammy Baldwin and Republican Shelly Capito for insisting on media education. A ‘Healthy Media for Youth’ bill gives me hope that a couple representatives in our government understand that when an advertiser alters an image of a woman and then she loses her job for not conforming to it, that’s not trivial, but an issue that affects all girls and the women they will grow into.

Here’s more on the Wisconsin bill from feministing.com

The bill, which has been referred to committee, proposes a three-pronged strategy to combat potentially dangerous media images: Media literacy, further research on the impact of consuming media that depicts women and girls in a less than positive light, and the formation of a national task force, run by the NIH, on girls and women in the media. You can read the whole bill here.

How flipping awesome would it be to know that federal money is going toward “countering the perpetuation and damaging effects of narrow, restrictive gender roles, stereotypes, and expectations, including the sexualization of female children, adolescents, and adults”? How about “teaching youth how to create and use media that contribute to social change, especially in their communities” or “facilitating connections between girls and women, and boys and men, as mentors”?

Sarah Palin gets ‘Foxified’ in new SNL skit

Posted on by
7

Last night Tina Fey reprised her Sarah Palin role on Saturday Night Live. I’m psyched Tina Fey’s brilliant parody is back. Not only is she hilarious, but her portrayals of the politician in 2008 were instrumental in turning America on to the silliness of Palin’s candidacy.

Tina Fey as Sarah Plain

Tina Fey was funny last night as usual, but here’s a new idea: instead of depicting Sarah Palin in her signature updo, Fey should show her losing her look because now she’s joined Fox, home of the pornstar/ anchor.

Here’s the skit.

SARAH PALIN GETS ‘FOXIFIED‘ (scary music)

Tina Fey is in her dressing room at Fox News. She’s got big, blonde Fox woman anchor hair, a bright pink suit with cleavage and new, large breasts. She’s surrounded by make up artists, hairdressers, stylists etc, all putting the finishing touches on her new look.

Make-up artist: “For your debut on Fox News, we want to keep it kind of natural. We’re just going with some rouge, some foundation, a little concealer, some blush, some mascara, some eyeshadow, some lipstick, some powder, some bronzer…”

Sarah Palin trying to wait patiently, finally interrupts, still looking at herself in the mirror: “I’m just not sure about the hair.”

Hairdresser: “Oh, it’s great! I’ve done lots of famous people– Pamela Anderson, Paris Hilton, Heidi Montag, Denise Richards, Kate Gosselin. Not a lot of people know this…” He bends down to her, “But they all had lots of problems. Their hair was…brown.”

SP: “What’s the matter with brown hair?”

HD: “Oh, nothing, honey. It’s just, you know, sometimes it can make you look… smart.”

Other make up people and stylist people nod.

SP: (Pats her hair) “Does everyone here get this kind of treatment?”

 

MA: “Oh, yes, sure. Although with guests, sometimes we just make suggestions. You know Anne Coulter? She used to weigh over 100 pounds.”

Bald and fat Fox News president, Roger Ailes enters, saying, “We’re so happy to have you here, Sarah. Come on out, lets meet your colleagues.”

RA puts his hand on SP’s back and leads her out of hair/make-up room.

There’s a group of blonde haired, big breasted, heavily made up women. Sarah Palin starts shaking their hands, smiling.

SP: “I’m so happy to meet you. I’m so excited to be part of the team.”

RA: “No, Sarah. Those are Tiger Woods mistresses. They’re about to go on Greta’s show.”

SP: “Oh.” (Looking confused)

RA: “Here are your colleagues.” He gestures to as second group of women, identical in look and dress to the first.

SP excitedly shakes hands.

RA: “You really look great Sarah. As you know, presentation is a big part of making the Fox Network a success. Hey look, here’s the star of the network!”

Enter Bill O’Reilly, looking slovenly and bald.

SP: “I’m a big fan!” She pumps Bill’s hand.

Other male stars get introduced until there’s a crowd of old, fat balding men. Sarah stands in front of women and men, everyone clapping and patting her on the back. Sarah faces the audience, smiling triumphantly. SP: “I’m so proud to be a part of this network! I can’t wait for my show go out to all 60 states! From Quebec all the way to Juneau, to tell America for the first time, Live from New York, it’s Saturday Night Fever!”

Please read my related post When women join the Fair and Balanced network, they get FOXIFIED.

 

When women join the “fair and balanced” network, they get “Foxified”

Posted on by
22

Even though I wasn’t a supporter of Sarah Palin, she was recently hired at Fox News, and I feel I need to warn her. After all, she’s a brunette who often wears glasses– a breed targeted for extinction in Foxworld.

There’s something creepy going on at Fox, and it’s not just the skewed way they choose to report the news. When a woman gets a job on the “fair and balanced” news network, she gets “Foxified.” No matter how she looks or how old she is when she signs her contract, these female contributors transform, appearing on our screens strangely clone-like, blonde and so heavily made up they all look around 40.

Greta Van Susteren famously made the cover of People after she scored her own show on the network and got “Foxified,” sporting much lighter hair and tighter skin.

When I used to produce talk radio programs for the ABC affiliate in the Bay Area, and the host had a legal issue he wanted to discuss, I often booked a brilliant and beautiful law professor as an expert: Lis Weihl. After 9/11, she was hired by Fox News. The next time I saw her on TV, I only recognized her by her name in the byline.

Fox News is a modern day Stepford factory for accomplished women. By turning professors and authors into porn star doppelgangers, the network effectively communicates what women say is not as important how they appear.

The older, winkled, balding male stars of the news channel obviously have different physical requirements to get a job on TV. Maybe Palin earns some of those privileges, because she’s already famous with her own loyal following. We’ll have to wait and see if her brown hair and Tina Fey glasses survive the preferences of Fox News President Roger Ailes, himself not the most svelte, glossy headed guy in town.

Update: I’m not attacking these women for getting jobs; I’m pointing out the sexist requirements for men versus women on TV. Furthermore, being “Foxified” doesn’t translate to being attractive or beautiful. As a commenter pointed out, it has to do with becoming a “femmebot.” The blonde dye jobs and overly made up faces on Fox News women are indicative of a culture dominated by caucasians and capitalism, keeping women in line by rewarding them when they conform to the rules. It’s a reflexive, but still clever, way to keep women in their place and uphold the power structure as it is.

Lis Wiehldailyuw.com 

Liz Wiehl

Lis Wiehl now, Lis Wiehl, “Foxified” 

Greta Van Susteren gets FoxifiedPeople 

Greta Van Susteren gets Foxified

Can you tell these women apart? 

Can you tell these women apart?

Michelle Obama gets a facelift from Good Housekeeping

Posted on by
Reply

First problem: there’s still a magazine called Good Housekeeping.

Magazines and newspapers are dying left and right, the whole publishing industry is imploding, yet Good Housekeeping lives on? It survives not only to give women crucial tips on vacuuming, ironing, or what Febreeze actually is, but to produce a commemorative “125th Anniversary Collector’s Issue” graced with the creepiest cover photo of Michelle Obama I’ve ever seen.

Michele ObamaGood Housekeeping 

Michele Obama

This from Jezebel’s Jessica Coen:

The entire bottom half of Michelle’s face seems to have been replaced, her forehead has been nicely tightened, and the entire right (our left) side of her face seems to have scored some extreme chiseling. A solid helmet head and weird lighting finish off her look.

Michelle Obama is a stunning woman in every way– why did Good Housekeeping transform her into a waxy, Stepford wife, lips and teeth bossed and glossed, hands clasped primly just under the appropriately wifey headline: “Keeping her marriage close, raising her girls and overcoming her biggest fear.”

I’m so tired of the media’s abuse of first ladies, forever handicapped by that prissy label. When a woman finally becomes president, I can guarantee her “spouse” will never be referred to as the “first gentleman” without irony.

And on a day even further into the future than the debut of “Madame President,” people will look back on how women were photoshopped into drag queen aliens and be completely appalled this was considered “attractive.” The only modern invention more disturbing than these computer altered coverwomen, is the transformation that happens when a woman gets hired by Fox News. For more on getting “Foxified, see this post.

Geena Davis’ new study on gender bias in kids’ media

Posted on by
Reply

Variety :

The L.A.-based Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media is set to release this summer the findings of a lengthy study on gender roles in movies and TV shows aimed at viewers 11 and under. The org is also planning a daylong conference in L.A. this fall. The institute has a programming unit dubbed See Jane that aims to work with execs, creatives and other industry orgs to encourage the inclusion of a wider range of femme characters in kid-oriented programming.

Geena Davis

Academy Award winning actress Geena Davis says, “Kids need to see entertainment where females are valued as much as males.”

Here is her institute’s mission:

While watching children’s television programs and videos with her then 2-year old daughter, Academy Award winner Geena Davis noticed a remarkable imbalance in the ratio of male to female characters. From that small starting point, Davis went on to raise funds for the largest research project ever undertaken on gender in children’s entertainment.

The research showed that in the top-grossing G-rated films from 1990-2005, there were three male characters for every one female – a statistic that did not improve over time.

The concern was clear: What message does this send to young children?

I can’t wait for this new study. Thank you to Geena Davis for recognizing the gender bias in kids movies and doing something to change it. Go Thelma!

Lift the curse, change the shape

Posted on by
Reply

After watching Joy Behar’s show on the Oscar curse, and hearing a male guest suggest that when actresses are “given this giant gold ballast, men get insecure.” Also, feeling that the curse is another way of letting women know they can’t have it all, I decided to start a movement.

Lift the curse, change the shape.

New Oscar Statuette