anythings.org

This poster for The Women is not ok with me:

Not only is the movie poster in the shape of a woman’s torso, it has outlines of (perfectly even) breasts in bright red lipstick. Oh, wait! Don’t forget the belly button, and the perfect Barbie waist and hips! I suppose it wouldn’t be so awful if the poster didn’t make a massive generalization about women and shove them into a stereotyped box. I’ve taken the time to type out the text for those who are curious and do not feel like squinting:

The girlfriends. The joy. The boding. The betrayals. The breakups. The makeups. The sex. The fun. The jealousy. The gossip. The success. The struggles. The marriage. The divorce. The beauty. The warmth. The work. The family. The dreams. The career. The husbands. The kids. The laughter. The tears. The secrets. The support. The lovers. The fighters. The balance. The intuition. The thighs. The shoes. The diets. The trust. The loyalty. The lies. The intellect. The elegance. The confidence. The doubt. The mothers. The daughters. The compassion. The courage. The humor. The passion. The love. The friendship. The women.

So not only do you have to be an intellectual mother who cares about her thighs, her shoes, and diets, but you have to have a career, elegance, and confidence - and be successful. I think the designers of this poster took the phrase “having it all” a little too seriously: they’ve suggested that a woman must experience all of this (with the perfect figure and red lipstick) in order to be a true woman and belong to the “women” collective. A woman is not a woman if she does have breasts, a belly button, a husband, some doubt, a few tears, and success.

Image from Wild About Movies.

I was more than a little shocked to see this article on the front page of CNN:

As the weather warms each spring, women — especially in cities with active sidewalk traffic — once again face catcalls from men. It’s a situation some find unnerving and an invasion of their space, while others ignore it or are even flattered by it.

“I call it street abuse,” said New York filmmaker Maggie Hadleigh-West, 49. “It’s unwanted attention and invasion of space.”

In her 1998 documentary “War Zone,” Hadleigh-West confronted catcallers and filmed their responses. Many of the men literally ran away to avoid talking to her about why they whistled or made a provocative comment. […]

“Being in a public space with a strange man who is being sexually aggressive is potentially dangerous,” Hadleigh-West added.

On the other hand, some women appreciate the attention in certain cases, like Jessica, a 31-year-old health-care educator in Los Angeles who declined to use her last name to protect her privacy.

“Yeah, it’s objectifying and all, but you know, if I walked down the street and didn’t have men looking me up and down and catcalling, I’d think, ‘Boy, I must really be getting old and dumpy,’ ” she said.

This is absolutely disgusting. Is that how you feel better about yourself? BY being verbally assaulted by men? I think it’s a little sad that the state of the world makes women feel flattered when they are being yelled at by strange men simply for existing. Where is your self esteem? Do you really need that much attention to feel good about yourself? I know I’m being a little more than harsh here, but I absolutely hate women like this. Especially when cat calling isn’t as innocent as a man being a jerk and asserting himself on a woman:

“There seems to be some evidence that it increases self-objectification,” said Fairchild, who surveyed 550 women both online and at Rutgers University in 2006 and 2007. The women — who ranged in age from 15 to 64 in the international online component and from 18 to 24 in the Rutgers survey of women from central New Jersey — were asked about their experiences with street harassment.

Catcalling “encourages women to look at themselves as body parts instead of as full, whole, intelligent human beings” and can cause women to fear for their safety, Fairchild says.

“When a man catcalls you, you don’t know if it will end at that point or if it could escalate to assault,” she added.

I’m glad that there is research being done on this - but I’m sad that it’s getting attention only after the article’s author finds some random woman who just lives for the attention cat calling provides her with.

You know, I was totally fine with this article, even the bits including the attention-seeking woman, until I reached the end:

“A lot of men have no idea that women don’t like being talked to in this way,” she said. “It never crosses their mind, and yelling doesn’t educate them. If you yell, they often don’t understand why you are upset and so they take it personally.”

Often, Kearl says, an assertive, clear response can illicit a kinder reaction than one expects.

“A lot of the time, I find guys will just say, ‘Oh, OK, I didn’t realize it made you feel that way. Thanks.’ “

Ok, now, really, as a woman who experiences cat calling because she has to dress up for work, I can honestly say that no matter how you respond to a man making sexual comments about you, they will still take it personally and be even bigger of an asshole about it. I have asked cat callers more than once if they think whistling and making sexual remarks at women is really the way to get their attention, and I’ve either been called a bitch, stupid, or a lesbian because of my return comment.

What is a man’s expectation when he says these things to a woman he doesn’t even know? Does he expect her to fawn over him in appreciation? Does he expect his comments to be appreciated, or does he know they are offensive?

I’m doing my part as a woman to make it clear that we don’t appreciate these comments, but I’m only one woman living in one small city - I can only do so much.

Apparently, a company called Pipedream Products (google at your own risk) produces celebrity blow up sex dolls as part of their “Super Star Series”. They have dolls of:

Eva Longoria: she’s your whore next door!
Lindsay Lohan: no witty slogan, just references to her bad driving and Herbie movie
Jessica Simpson: Crazy Daisy! (pictured)
Jessica Alba: Jessica Sin, explore the dark side of this sexy lil angel!
Sarah Jessica Parker: Sex in her Shitty, She loves Big!, and Sarah Jessica Porkher

You can view all of the images here (if you dare). While some of the dolls do not look identical to the real person, they similarities are uncanny, especially when they borrow from current or past roles to encourage the sense of familiarity and desire.

This is absolutely disgusting. While I am horrified by sex dolls and the way they objectify women’s bodies for the sole purpose of sexual fulfillment, I am sick to my stomach at the thought of these dolls being produced. I’m not big on lawsuits, but I could definitely get behind any of these women for suing the shit out of Pipedream Products for producing sex dolls in their likeness.

I can understand that for some people, sex dolls are an innocent fetish and they do not intend to objectify women… but too bad. You do. A sex doll is 100% under the control of its owner and serves as a passive sex object. These women did not consent for their likeness to be used to create a sex toy, and highly doubt many women (except for those who have willingly entered the sex industry) would.

There is a huge difference between female porn stars and these dolls. For one, (most) female porn stars provide their consent every time they make a pornographic film. For another, well, they have a pulse. I don’t really know what I can say to illustrate the vast difference between sex workers and sex toys. Some sex workers feel a sense of agency in their work, while others are forced into it and suffer from violence, drug addiction, and STDs. Sex toys, more accurately sex dolls, are not alive, they cannot consent. They are passive recipients, to put it mildly. For the women whose likenesses have been used to create these dolls, I’m sure it’s a more horrifying experience and an extreme personal violation. I highly doubt they see the dolls as passive recipients of sex.

[Image from Splash News]

A man in Oklahoma was found not guilty under a “Peeping Tom” statute for putting his camera up a 16 year old girl’s skirt (without her consent, obviously) and taking photos. Don’t go commando in Oklahoma!

What kind of world do we live in where this kind of violation is legal? At the very least I would think of this as sexual assault or some sort of violation of privacy. Apparently the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals disagrees with me.

From the Feminist Majority Foundation:

Oklahoma’s Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that taking pictures up someone’s skirt in a public place is not a crime. The court voted 4-1 in favor of 34-year-old Riccardo Ferrante who was arrested for putting his camera up an unsuspecting 16-year-old girl’s skirt in a department store, reports the Associated Press.

The lone dissenting voter on the court, Appeals Judge Gary Lumpkin, wrote, “What this decision does is state to women who desire to wear dresses that there is no expectation of privacy as to what they have covered with their dress. In other words, it is open season for peeping Toms in public places who want to look under a woman’s dress.”

Ferrante was charged under Oklahoma’s “Peeping Tom” statute, which makes such offenses felonies punishable of up to 5 years in prison. Tulsa World reports that the court ruled that the statute only applies in situations where the victims are in a reasonably private place such as their own homes, a restroom, or a locker room.

State Representative Pam Peterson is working on a bill to reform the current “Peeping Tom” statute so that it will also include offenses committed in public places. She also proposes to change the statute from a felony to a misdemeanor.

Tulsa County District Attorney Tim Harris told Tulsa World, “How do I go back to this victim and tell her she has no expectation of privacy to her private parts in a public place?”

Emphasis mine. Absolutely ridiculous!

[Image from Getty]

Having a semi-scientific background and understanding the ways in which scientific studies work, I have to say I was more than a little miffed to read this article about a study done linking adolescent girls’ weight to their perception of their own popularity. They claimed that girls who viewed themselves as unpopular gained more weight over a two year period than girls who viewed themselves as popular. What was the weight difference, you ask? Popular girls only gained 6.5 pounds over two years, while unpopular girls gained 11.

While how a woman feels about herself can be important when looking at her weight gain and loss, it isn’t always the source of their “fat”. I have met fat, popular high school girls and I have also met skinny unpopular high school girls - all whose happiness did not hinge on their weight. But then again, what one person knows isn’t true for the entire world of American high schoolers. Unless, of course, I’m completely off base here and everyone is walking around high school in mini skirts and stilettos like the ladies of Mean Girls.

Now, maybe it’s just me being “old” and “uncool” (ok, I’m 22, I’m not that old and uncool)… but have things really changed so much since I was in high school? Sure, girls were dieting and drinking Slim Fast for lunch - or skipping lunch altogether - but they were not nearly as concerned with their weight as high school girls are today. The last time I sat in a room surrounded by 15 year old girls was only a few months ago and all they seemed to care about what their weight, their appearance, and how this would attract boys. They spent eons criticizing other girls out of the yearbook or on their MySpace pages and almost as long looking at themselves in a mirror. Maybe it’s because I went to high school in a smaller and less urban town, but there is something wrong with this picture. Are young girls really connecting thinness with popularity?

Of course, we can always blame the celebrities, models, and other worthlessly famous individuals for this sudden “thin is in” craze. We can even blame Apple, Inc. for their last iMac commercial - “Thin is Powerful.” But really, can we blame anybody? Thin has been in for quite awhile. We can’t blame Lindsay Lohan or Nicole Richie for a trend that has been raging for years - more years than I think most of us have been alive.

While I’m sure being rail thin, but supple in all the right places, has helped many actresses and talentless famous people further their “careers”, is it really helping people in the real world? Other than the occasional “scientific study” claiming pretty people get hired more frequently and those of us blessed with an hourglass body make more money, there isn’t really much of a claim to be had by being thin.

One minor reflection on the previously mentioned study: they compared girls using their self-reports of popularity. While they are claiming to link a girls “self-image” of her popularity with her weight, how do we know this wasn’t impacted by a psychological illness such as depression, or even more serious life events such as sexual assault, family problems, or trouble with classes? Or, even more minor in a researcher’s eye, a recent break-up with a boy who told a girl she was disgusting and nobody would ever love her? In addition to this, they compared 4,264 self-reported popular girls with only 182 self-reported unpopular girls, leaving quite a few questions unanswered as far as I’m concerned.

This study is trying to link a poor self-image of popularity with unhappiness by preying on our deeply ingrained stereotypes that nobody likes a fat girl.

While the data for this study was taken in 1999, they are interpreting the it with today’s societal perceptions of body image and weight, which have become more and more in favor of increasingly thinner bodies. I was a high school freshman just turning 15 in 1999 and I knew I was dreadfully unpopular. Hell, I was even harassed on a daily basis for being rail thin and flat as a board and I still didn’t gain the weight this study is claiming the girls they took data on did. I didn’t even weigh 100 pounds, and didn’t hit anything above 110 until after I was in college for two years. While my weight is mostly due to genetics, my self-image didn’t have much of an impact on whether or not I gained weight.

But then again, I like to think of myself as a fairly logical and level-headed person: I don’t connect two variables together that are entirely unrelated and try to draw conclusions to support society’s stereotypes.

Apparently, men don’t think Sarah Jessica Parker is attractive. This probably because she’s over 25 and has wrinkles, but I digress. The readers in an online poll at Maxim voted her as unsexy. The best part? She doesn’t give a shit. One more reason to love SJP:

Sarah Jessica Parker is nonplussed at her most most recent accolade: being named the Unsexiest Woman Alive by an online magazine poll in America. “What they don’t know is that one day I’ll wake up fat,” the Sex and the City star says. “But I’ll still be happy, just like I am now. I believe in the old ’sticks and stones’ philosophy, so frankly their words don’t come close to hurting.”

My question is why did Maxim feel the need to single out SJP and call her unsexy? Why did they think it was ok for them to do that? Men’s magazines never seen to get it right when it comes to women… not like that’s a big shocker.
Source, source.

The Feminist Wetblanket is back (a day late and a dollar short - what does that mean, anyways?) with an article on plastic surgery and what exactly we’re losing when we go under the knife.

Beauty and youth are perhaps the two most valued attributes in US society. While one could argue that money, fame, power, kindness, etc, are more valued that beauty or youth, it is difficult to argue against the facts and figures. The cosmetics industry alone spends about $18 billion a year in the United States alone marketing and creating products. Compare this with the statistic from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons: in 2006, almost 11 million cosmetic plastic surgeries were performed in the United States.

Whether it be a fear of growing old, losing a significant other, or not being valued anymore, tons of Americans are lining up outside of Dr. 90210’s office to get their labia reduced, breasts and butts augmented, and noses chipped away. It may not even be fear, it may simply be the desire to be “beautiful”. But with all this plastic surgery, what are we losing?

Of course, in Hollywood, cosmetic procedures are “necessary” to maintain that young and “fresh” look. But even with all of these procedures, older actresses are not getting main movie roles. Save few exceptions in Helen Mirren and others, there are almost no “older” (read: 40-something) women in Hollywood gaining lead movie roles. So really… the plastic surgery isn’t saving their careers as much as it’s proving just how undesirable women like Demi Moore would later feel when they suddenly found themselves out of work. While Hollywood may not be the best play to draw inferences from, it is important to ask how does this influence those living outside of Tinsel Town?

Models, actresses, singers, and other entertainers are looked to as trend setters for what’s hot and what’s not. The ongoing debate over who brought leggings back - was it the Olsen twins or Lindsay Lohan? - is just one example of how something so frivolous as legwear can cause the fashion community to ignite. But what about when it comes to more important - and potentially dangerous - trends like botox, breast augmentations, tummy tucks, and face lifts? What message are these trend setters sending?

It’s highly unlikely that any person attempting to peruse the magazine section of their local bookstore can find a glossy without a section devoted to plastic surgery. Whether it be a “then and now” comparison of celebrities and their plastic surgery denials or an article weighing the benefits and consequences of the latest liposuction technique, it’s guaranteed to be there. It’s in our faces and we can’t hide from it.

Now don’t get me wrong, plastic surgery can have its benefits - it can save burn victims or be used to remove big scary scars. But when plastic surgery is used to remove that extra bit of fat from your ass and implant it into your cheeks or lips I’m pretty sure the only justifiable reason for that is vanity. You’re doing more than just distributing fat when you’re under that knife: you’re telling yourself just how much you dislike your physical appearance. Who can blame you, of course, with all the pressure from advertisements and the media pushing slim bodies and large breasts onto you from an early age?

I’m not a fan of plastic surgery and would never dream of getting a procedure done because I’m grateful for the body I have and I love all the woobly bits and its squishy-ness. I can understand the desire to remove scars or a birth defect (which some may consider unsightly, while others consider it a part of themselves) or even undergo a breast reduction for health reasons, but I can’t understand going from a B cup to a D cup, or getting a new nose. But for the women who go in to have their noses reshaped or their chins adjusted, can they really say they love their body? There’s a huge difference between being concerned about your appearance and getting the occasional fake tan or working out and making an appointment to have your breasts redone or your tummy tucked in.

As a feminist, I can accept that there are different kinds of beauty of there and not all of them may be culturally acceptable. While there may be some feminists going under the knife to get a bigger x or a smaller y, they probably have a different prespective on things than I do. In reality, this is all about perspective: whether or not you truly love your body and yourself or whether or not you can withstand the pressure of the full-frontal assault of the media and entertainment industries. When we go under the knife, we’re not just solving those little physical imperfections, we’re losing self respect.

[image from getty]