On Kate Middleton

By Anči
 

Since bringing up Kate Middleton in my post on weddings I’ve wanted to further unpack the duchess's role as Global ambassador to upper class white women:

Because let’s face is: Kate Middleton is more than just a princess or a celebrity--  she’s also the living manifestation of flawless womanhood. (A position only recently dominated by Santa Angelina Jolie.)  

Look at her. The woman literally has no bad angles.

Like Jolie, Kate has bravely accepted the mantle of envied, unattainable perfection;  and in doing so, has invoked an age-old contract with the people : Essentially this covenant grants Her Highness unchallenged status and admiration, in exchange for her unwavering commitment to maintaining a glamorous facade, fit for public consumption. 

True to her pact, our Kate has managed to do this in a number of ways--Most notably, by never ever appearing in public without her trademark, professionally blown-out hair.  (an unrealistic and impractical demand for us common folk, who regularly go to sleep with a wet ponytail, and a nasal strip.) She also projects the consistently classy,  confident image required of any inaugurated Alpha Female.  And just like her flawless foremothers  Kate is a star, of the rare variety, able to  effortlessly produce a credible (and winsome!) smile on demand.  And  In a typically mystical fashion, she has never been seen with a frown on her face, or other such unacceptably humanizing expression. Add to that a sexy royal pregnancy, and you've got superwoman.

I was too lazy to spend time looking for a brunette version.

Speaking of her pregnancy, you might recall that during that gestating time, Kate's image was  frequently  positioned next to her equally-knocked-up celeb-peer,  Kim Kardashian. (Unlike perfect Kate, Kim proved woefully incapable of cultivating a concave baby bump-- a defect for which the reality star was thoroughly shamed.)

Kate on the other hand, only reinforced her place as the mythical shepherd of unattainably slender motherhood—by consistently "outperforming" her supposed "celeb-rivals" in the media-manufactured baby-weight battle of the ages: Check it out:

 Since entering the spotlight, Kate Middleton has been primarily lauded for her looks :  the ideal girl with  shiny hair, a tight body, and glamorous wardrobe. More importantly, She's  the woman who captured the heart of the future King of England--  a supposedly impressive feat (?) reserved only for the most Angelina-like of dames. Surely then, it was acceptable to expect unmatched perfection from her. Anything less would be insulting, right?

No one can look this cute all the time!

Wait no. Apparently they can.

I want to hate her but,...she's just too adorable!

Despite fairing so well initially,  as  ambassador of white womanhood, and Chief Guardian of the Eternal Feminine Mystery. (Which, I hear is preserved inside a golden tampon, inserted by Queen Elizabeth herself,) some cracks have started to appear, on Kate's royal semblance.
The most recent glitches in her cylon veneer, literally sprouted out of her head, (in the form of unsightly grey hairs)  rendering the princess, alarmingly and visibly human. Check it out:

the face of decay

As expected, the people did not take kindly to the Royal acquisition of silvere: with  criticism escalating to widespread outrage. (I'm not exaggerating. Google it.)


 The chief objection from the hair-police,  seemed to lie in Middleton's refusal to acquiesce to the terms of the aforementioned Unattainable-Perfection-Pact. With the the majority of commentators expressing some of version of "Isn't it her job to impress us all the time? How she dare step out in public looking like that, bollocks wanker Dumbledore?" (I failed British 101)
Along with complaints about her hair, there were also a surge of ageist potshots directed at her "sagging" "baggy" skin, and under-eye circles.

It was the  familiar, brutal  takedown of a famous beauty's appearance, and it wasn't surprising.
 Any woman who teases perfection, is eventually punished, when she fails to follow through. And no one ever "follows through" because even beauties are people, and nobody's perfect.

 This is not to suggest that Kate has fallen from grace-- she still commands the attention and envy of billions of people,  but like any woman in power, she'll also continue experiencing a backlash of body shaming, and contempt rarely directed at men in similar positions.

Thoughts?


To follow this blog on facebook, go here

On Self-Pleasure and Scottish Royalty

By Anči

Anyone close to me knows that I am a sucker for two things: geeky men of color and soapy period dramas.
Regarding the former, (which I'm hoping means "the first thing I said") I have no complaints. (hi honey!)  But regarding the latter, I've always felt there was something missing.

That is until I discovered CW's "historical" drama (a series called "Reign")  about Mary Queen of Scots.
Now I use the term "historical" loosely, since the show is technically about a non-existent love triangle between Queen Mary, Prince Frances and his made-up brother Bash. (it figures the only hot dude would be the figment of a hungry writer's imagination.)

check out those fashion-forward 16th century lovebirds.

Then there's the small matter that Queen Mary looked more like this:

hubba hubba

and less like this:

pretty sure the real Queen of Scots would have been executed for wearing this outfit. Oh wait*

But whatever, it's TV right? And this post isn't meant to be a review of the show (which by the way, gets 10 stars!!!!)

 The reason I wanted to bring the show up, (other then to plug it. Cause it needs to stick around for six seasons and a movie,*)  is because of an alleged controversy regarding a hastily censored moment in the first episode
 Turns out the offending shot was of a lady in waiting getting sexual pleasure in some other way than the traditional penis-in-her-vagina method.
 Yes that's right, Miss abigail was fondling her own garden.**

The scene was then recut to simply suggest that the renaissance babe had started lowering her hand... just as the King of France appears and romantically creepily offers to "help her out." (Hey, that's how my grandparents met too!)

because it's somehow less upsetting to see a middle aged man hijack a young woman's solo-session, than it is to see the same woman happily finger-banging herself in peace.

Everytime you wank it, a monarch loses his wings.

This isn't the first or last time a film or TV show has refused to air dramatizations of women getting off without the aid of a penile implant.
In fact, it just happened recently to actress Evan Rachel Wood in her upcoming movie Charlie Countryman:

Says the article: "According to Wood, the Motion Picture Association of America  forced [the] director to cut images of Shia le Beouf's character performing oral sex on Wood's character in order to secure an R-rating ...as opposed to an NC-17 rating, which can tank the commercial viability of a film."

Really? Simulated cunnilingus is too graphic for Hollywood?

Now think about the number times you've seen a woman kneeling in front a guy in an R-rated movie. Then think of all the times you've seen a guy on top, or behind of, a woman in an R-rated movie. Then remember all the  times you've seen a male character sexually assault or rape a female character in an R-rated movie.  So ...why exactly does the harmless image of a dude performing oral sex on a woman automatically render a film NC-17?

I'll tell you why. Because in that case, it's the woman who's on the receiving end of pleasure. AND she's also getting it without the assistance of man-meat.. Which no doubt freaks a lot of male studio execs out. (sorry guys, your dongs aren't that special. and penis-envy isn't real!)

thoughts?



* Spoiler alert: she really did get executed.

*copywrite dan harmon

** I know the character's name is  Kenna. 'Abigail' can also means lady in waiting. (Shows how many bodice-rippers you've read, Myrtle.)

Dark is beautiful: How Indian women are redefining beauty

By Anči

You may remember the controversial Miss USA pageant from September-- featuring our first lady of homegrown babedom, Nina Davuluri. You may also remember that she looks like this:

"Kneel before your queen!"

And sometimes, like this:

"Traditional American values"

As you might recall, the Miss USA fanbase  (which granted, is comprised of a "select" class of people,) all reacted by losing their minds. There were slurs  tweeted,  followed by totally reasonable accusations of terrorism, and of course digs at her "formerly fat body."
But I'm not here to go into that because A) it's boring B) we already knew that anyone who follows this televised celebration of misogyny must be pretty stupid.

What really fascinates me then, isn't America's reaction, but India's. As Mallika Rao of the Huffington post put it, the "unfortunate irony" is that "Davuluri is dark-skinned. In India, where skin color is a national obsession, you likely wouldn't see someone of her complexion in a pageant, much less winning one."

She's right about skin color being a national obsession in India, where "fairness creams" and skin bleach are hawked like candy. According to the BBC, "One market research firm even reported that more skin lightening creams are sold in India than Coca Cola"

Well why wouldn't they be, judging by these ads?

With our product, anyone can Photoshop half their face

Fairness cream: as painless and natural as it looks

"Look how far I can rotate my head!"

I want to make it clear that my intention is not to make fun of India, here. For one thing many of these skin-whitening products are owned by American Corporations, (including companies like Dove, Garnier, and Vaseline,)  all eager to exploit a social injustice. And let's not pretend it's not in America's interest to reinforce a white standard of beauty wherever it's least attainable. (By the way,  how brazen is it to promote a concept of beauty that favors you? I can almost picture a creepy executive saying"Guys, from now on the official standard beauty is what I look like." Insecure much, white people?)
But I do want to hold Indian society accountable, for their complicity in the system, which unfairly targets young women. According to actress and activist Nandita Das, the woman behind the  burgeoning "Dark is Beautiful" campaign, India's whiteness obsession is "a prejudice [which] has driven some young women to the brink of suicide." This is primarily due to the central role "fairness" plays in landing women a husband; an inequality routinely exploited by capitalists. This is evidenced by the slew of products intended for "prospective brides, which now includes a bleach for vaginal purity. (We all know what scented soap does to lady bits. Now try and picture bleach down there.)

You can view that particularly delightful TV commercial right here: And once you have,  note how heavily it leans on the wifely pressures Indian women experience. That's right:  in this perfectly healthy on-screen representation of wedded bliss, the husband acts cold and distant towards his wife until she applies the "fairness formula" to her junk, at which point he deems her worthy enough of affection. (Nice.)
Like all campaigns aimed at female consumers, the primary tactic involves systematically undermining our confidence. (I can tell you right now confident women don't bleach their vaginas.)

In fact, self-esteem is so linked to fairness, that the "dusky-skinned" Nandita Das, (a success by any standards) often gets asked "How can you be so confident despite being so dark?"

"Oh I don't know. Maybe it's because I'm a freaking movie star?"

This brings me back to Miss USA winner Nina Davuluri, who as a Hindu newspaper recently speculated: "would have been... a person with low self-esteem and few friends," adding that "had she been in India, far from entering a beauty contest, it is more likely that Ms Davuluri would have grown up hearing mostly disparaging remarks about the colour of her skin."

Let that sink in for a minute.  Nina Davuluri, who was literally just hailed America's Popular Girl, would have been condemned to a life of rejection and loneliness, in India. It might also be  reasonable to assume that  this "alternate-universe Davuluri" would invest considerable resources in fairness creams--  with potentially flesh-melting consequences. According to Indian blogger Sarah Malik, those consequences could include "burns, rashes and permanent skin damage." Malik goes on to  recall an eerie memory of "a young woman who came from a summer holiday.... bleached at least ten shades lighter, her skin, a strange chalky pallor." I'm sure it was worth it though?
 But luckily for women like Davuluri and Malik, the "Dark is beautiful" campaign has gained significant traction since its launch in 2009.  In fact, the project has been credited with renewing interest in a more inclusive culture of Indian beauty--particularly among young women. Malik warrmly echoes their newly-acquired outlook, writing: "I hope the 'Dark is beautiful' or 'Brown is beautiful' call-out becomes just as celebratory for the young   men and women struggling to see the beauty in being brown."

Thoughts?

Introducing "thigh gap"

 By Ana CL

As if our beauty standards weren't arbitrary enough, there's been a new regulation introduced to its ever-shrinking confines.

Introducing thigh gap:  the creepy, and inexplicable obsession of sexy people all over the  Western Hemisphere!

It used to be that a person's hotness could be determined through such straightforward means as: establishing facial symmetry, or  calibrating stomach flatness. (it doesn't count if you're sucking in!) Gone are the days, when the markers of beauty were limited to a sufficiently adorable nose, or a  sufficiently white mother. It seems we have now reached the age of the Mandatory Thigh Gap.

Thigh gap, or that gap between a skinny woman's thighs, was covertly inducted into the Official Hall of  Beauty standards, sometime in 2013. (Apparently, while I was in the shower.)
And like all healthy people,  I am still coming to terms with this development. Over a second lunch.