A Wrecker of Civilization

So, I don't remember how we came upon it, but my partner and I ended up watching clips of Sasha Grey on the Tyra Show this past week. For those of you who don't know, Sasha Grey is a popular porn star and self proclaimed pervert and Tyra is a has been model who hosts her own talk show.

(Note that the video was edited by the Tyra Show and was posted on YouTube with commentary by an anti-pornography blog)

I know that pornography has a bad rep and its easy to say that its all degrading and disempowering to women, but I have to disagree. Now, this is all a huge generalization, because I know that there is some degrading porn out there (where you can tell that the-usually the female-performer is not enjoying the scene), but you can't simply judge all pornographic material because of a few bad apples.

Before I go on I realize that I'm terribly biased. Because:
1. I cannot stand Tyra. She is often very biased-if she does not agree with you, she makes it clear. She talks over guests quite often and equally as often she puts words in their mouths or belittles them.
2. I really respect Sasha and enjoy a lot of her work.

Although Tyra dwelled on Sasha's age, I believe she said she was nineteen at this time, Tyra didn't take in mind the level of maturity and intellect that Sasha possessed. Sasha knew what she was doing when she entered the porn industry.

I think Sasha is a good example of an empowered women in pornography. She enjoys what she does and she finds pleasure in many non conventional ways. In an interview with Bizarre Magazine she talks about everything from anal sex to puke play to BDSM(bondage/discipline/sadomasochism). I think that her lack of shame regarding her sexuality is what I really respect the most.

"Shame is bad because it inhibits you," she says. "It's fear. I'm not gonna sit here and say I'm not afraid of certain things in our society sometimes, but we live in such a fear-based society, people are really afraid to be who they are. Whether it's because of what somebody else thinks or the culture around them. Shame stops your personal growth."
-A Women's Lib Discussion

I think that all humans, not just women, would be happier if we stopped worrying about what is normal or expected of us and just acted on what we want. And although I think pornography is a safe place to vicariously live out your fantasies without any judgment from a partner, we still shouldn't be afraid of self-exploration or experimentation.

Taking a Stand by Sitting Down

Though it's wonderful to hear about all people taking a stand, creating a buzz and being passionate about a cause in their communities, it seems to me even more extraordinary when those people are very young.


Will Phillips is a ten year old boy from Arkansas. He has refused to recite the Pledge of Alligence because as Will said “I really don't feel that there's currently liberty and justice for all.” He was speaking about the limited rights of the LGBT community-particularly in respect to marriage. He faced much bullying at school due to the fact that he made a stand for gay rights, but he is a strong willed individual who is continuing to remain seated and sticking to what he beileves is right.


This story really warmed my heart because he wasn't reciting a script handed to him by his parent, he was speaking out on his own. For anyone to recognize injustices and have the courage to speak up about them is beautiful. And I think Will is a great role model for other youngsters in America.

You can read more about his story here.

The Word of the Day is "Rape"

Now, I understand that language changes and evolves over time-words gain new(/mulitple) meanings or lose meanings. But I have noticed a trend that I find particularly unsettling: The "new" use of the word rape.

When trying to find a seemingly non-existent song, I noticed this comment on the page I was searching:





This person uses the term rape to mean "to exceed"/"to be superior to"/"to conquer". And while the common definition of rape is a. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person or b. an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation, which goes along the same lines of conquering a persons personal space/privacy through force, the main difference between the use in the example (comment above) and the dictionary definition is connotation.

Whereas the dictionary definition is a very negative view of rape (or our social view- as far as I understand), the "new" usage seems to view "rape" as an achievement of power over someone or something else/something to be celebrated or praised.

I personally think that our language is just a reflection of how we think, and as new ideas and inventions/technology arise, we create new words for them. But we are still more reluctant to change the language that is already set, even when our society does change.

How much do you think language plays into how people think? Or how much do you think how people think shapes our language? Does giving a word like rape a definition as something to be admired create a social consciousness of acceptance of the word and perhaps make the action seem less bad?

WWE

I know that its been a bit since we covered the topic of the WWE in class, but, to be honest, I kind of thought wrestling was not very relevant to modern pop culture. That was, until the past week in some of my favorite tv shows-really just South Park and It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia-wrestling has been a main plot line.

I'm glad that South Park did a WWE inspired episode because -although they used to be known best for their frequent killings of Kenny and fart jokes- now they typically are more known for their clever satire
This particular episode compared professional wrestling to soap operas, very "manly"low brow soap operas.

After the boys saw a professional wrestling match they decided to join the school wrestling team. But after they realized that "real" wrestling was just guys rolling on a mat together, they decided to start a backyard wrestling club, which gained a lot of attention in the community-especially the "they took 'ur jobs" (read: working class) crowd, with their over-the-top plot lines (one promiscuous young girl-played by Cartman-was addicted to getting abortions) and violent fight scenes.


They took the idea that it's all just acting. The public doesn't want to see men actually wrestling, as its perceived as "gay", but they do want to watch women portrayed as sluts and men to be violent and macho.

Sexy bitches

So, here, another Halloween themed post because, well, its very close and its all around!

I've noticed a weird new trend this year. Not only are the women's (and sometimes teen's) costumes hyper-sexualized, now we've even brought out pets into the mix. The site SpoiledRottenDoggies offers costumes for both pet and owner, so you can "Be sexy together with these adorable matching costumes for sexy ladies and their pups!"

To the left, is a puppy pictured in the iconic "naughty school girl" costume. And is even striking a sexual? pose.

Certainly the over-sexualization of females, and teens, is a problem in our society... are our pets next?

What do you call serious rocks?

I can be very certain that its October now, because I've been seeing Halloween costume ads all over the internet/in the papers. I always like looking through them because, well, I just like looking and every year I'm always slightly confused by the womens costumes vs. the men's.

For example:



These are both referee costumes. Now, in real life, a male referee and a female referee would be wearing the same uniform. They would both be wearing the realistic and practical version that is worn by the male here. Why is it that most all Halloween costumes for women are just a sluttier version of the real thing? Is Halloween an outlet for women to let their sexual side be seen without the risk of being judged so harshly (because it's just a costume)?

And similarly for men, this seems to be a way for men to dress in a feminine manner (sometimes in full drag) without the fear of being ridiculed. (Example to the left.)

It seems that in our society, the worst thing a woman could be labeled is a slut and the worst a man could be labeled is effeminate. So is Halloween a chance for Americans to embrace their fears? Or rebel against society, in a campy matter, by being exactly what we're told not to be?

It's Gay To Smoke

New Anti-Smoking Ads Warn Teens 'It's Gay To Smoke'

When I first saw the title for this video, I was shocked! I was completely outraged that any marketer would have the audacity to play on the public's homophobia to keep teens from smoking!?

After opening the video, however, I realized that it was created by The Onion(an American "news satire"). I was relieved that this wasn't a serious ad, but at the same time, sadly, I feel as though this campaign might be effective in cutting back the number of young boys who smoke in America.

The most offensive thing one boy can do to another boy is emasculate him. In our culture, we seem to think that homosexual men aren't as masculine as heterosexual men. Calling a boy gay is along the same lines as calling him a sissy, or a girl-they all question the boy's masculinity. Like they said in the video, kids don't care about health risks, but they do care about their reputation and being bullied.

Save The Ta-Tas

Whenever anyone in my house mentions breast cancer awareness month, they usually end up calling it breast awareness month. (It was probably a mistake at first, but then it just seemed to stick.) And although cancer seems to be the main purpose of awareness, the breasts always seem to be the main attraction. At least thats how it seems when you look at some of the campaigns that are helping to raise awareness.



These campaign marketers know that sex sells (as do kitschy gimmicks). And while the ads are amusing/clever and attention grabbing (like the ad above), they may be seen as somewhat insensitive to those who have had to lose their breasts in a battle with cancer. The ads are placing the focus on peoples love for large, bouncy boobs. In the ad above, the men and women both stop dead in their tracks to stare at the voluptuous woman walking by in a tiny bikini. The ad may not just be offensive to breast cancer survivors, but to all women, for the objectification of the women(who are just presented as boob holders).

Other campaign ads like the Save The Ta-Tas or The Save Second Base Ad also use provocative tee shirt logos to draw extra attention to the breasts of the woman wearing the tee. The 'Second Base' logo goes a step further.
I think it's great that these campaigns are thinking of new and interesting ways of drawing in viewers attention, and making a positive message into a fun tee shirt(a human billboard), but at the same time I feel that some people may be put off by this mode of advertising. Could the kitschy tees make it seem that the matter of cancer is not taken as seriously as it should be? And is there any equally effective way of raising awareness for women's health without having to objectify them?

The Art Manliness

What does it mean to be a man?
Well, according to Old Spice brand deodorant, it means: being athletic, being intelligent, being strong and, most importantly, not being a woman.All of these elements of manliness are obviously pointed out in the commercial above. The ad is showing that for the different types of men(or the different aspects of masculinity) they need to have different scents. The aspects of manliness could be put into four general categories of power: social, economic, political, and physical.

From one positive view, because even though it's ideas of masculinity are still very old fashioned, it says to the viewers that you don't necessarily need to encompass all aspects of masculinity to be a "real" man. I think this idea might make some men feel secure in their masculinity even if they are not the archetypal male and it would lead them to feel as if they are still fit into one of these categories that are opposing aspects of femininity.

However, still, this could make a man feel like if he is not fulfilling all the possible aspects of his own masculinity, it could make him feel like "less of a man". Typically, when men feel emasculated they tend to over compensate one aspect of their masculinity. For example if a man is of the working class(meaning he may have limited political, economic power) he may have physical power (as a laborer, he may be more physically fit) and may be more likely to over compensate his social power(by being more controlling of his family/partner). And if a man is of the upper class(meaning he may have a desk job and not be as physically fit)he may have more economic and political power(as he may be wealthier) and be more likely to over compensate his social power as well(by being similarly more controlling of his family/partner)to make up for his lack of physical strength.

In all, I think the idea of highlighting only the differences between men and women(and generalizing to boot!) is unproductive because its only driving people to see their differences and to judge how we feel about ourselves based completely on how we view others. A man can only feel manly in opposition of women or "weaker"/subordinate men. And he can only be emasculated in comparison of women and lesser men.

Spotting the "Hoo-Hoo"

Phallic symbols are used all over. They're usually a sign of power and dominance. Other times just for kitsch(weird how a penis can be a symbol of power or something humorous). But the use of vaginal imagery in ads seems much less commonplace.

I came across an article called Spot the Hoo-Hoo. Most are obviously directed at women. Few towards both sexes.
Here are two examples of ads directed at women. The left, Dior lipstick, and the right, a womens magazine. The images here are symbols of feminine beauty and interest.


The ads below are for womens health. The ad to the left is for pro-choice/anti-abortion and the ad to the right is an ad against rape/violence towards women. They use the subtle image of the female anatomy to represent women's strength in facing issues.


Why is it then that hinting at masculinity makes a product accessible to both men and women, but femininity only seems to be marketable to women?

Where my girls at?

Video-gaming has long been a male dominated past time. And it seems it might be silly to ask why when we look at the hyper-sexualized portrayals of women in many games.

The average women in video games has an unrealistically proportioned body. (A women with her actual measurements would topple over from the weight of her breasts.) And of course, with such an "amazing" body (like these pictured below: Ivy of Soul Calibur(left) and Laura Croft(right)) they should want to show off. And they do, even though these costumes may seem completely impractical for any task at hand.

How can women expect to feel comfortable playing a game that makes them feel like they are being objectified?

I'm Sorry, You're Just A Tool

The second season of Tool Academy premiered this Monday night on VH1. The plot: Twelve obnoxious, macho men are brought to a relationship boot camp by their fed-up girlfriends.


When I first heard of this show/saw the promo I thought it looked like a hideous display of extreme gender stereotypes: the female- pretty and passive; and the male- an egocentric, meathead who's only cares involve womanizing, drinking beer, pumping iron and womanizing.

The opening credits seemed to reassert this idea of stereotyping(but, perhaps in a lighter fashion). They explain that this show will turn these "tools" into "Knights in shining armor". I felt that this was just a less extreme gender norm for males, which still places them as the dominant sex(as it implies that the females are just "damsels in distress" in need of saving). But I tried to stay optimistic because ultimately the show is about reform and change.

The men initially thought that they were auditioning to become "International Party Kings" and endorsing an energy drink marketed for women. (They had to be tricked into coming on the show because, in typical cocky "alpha-male" fashion, they would be too proud to admit that they needed to change their ways.) When the men still believed they were auditioning they exhibited their most over-the-top "cool"(read: chauvinistic male) behavior. This included getting near nude to show off their very developed muscles, being aggressively flirtatious with the female audience members, being as loud and vain as possible and bragging about their vast number of sexual conquests. But, when they found out their girlfriends were there, watching their every move, most of them quickly replaced their hard masculine exterior with a more caring and emotive skin. One contestant, Big John, revealed in therapy that he felt pressured to play the part of this ultra-masculine person because he felt that he was always looked at as a strong male role by others and felt he had to keep it up to not disappoint them.

Overall, I realize that the basic premise of the show is still quite empowering for both sexes (by helping them overcome these stereotypes) because its giving these formerly passive women the voice to speak up and tell their "douche bag" boyfriends that they want the respect that they deserve. Or, alternatively, that they want out. (Its the girlfriends who chooses to leave with or without her unreformed "tool" boyfriend.) And it gives these formerly superficial guys the opportunity to shed their macho facades and let their emotions out freely.

Maybe shows like this will change (absurd but) common ideas like "girls like assholes" or "nice guys finish last".