Japanese Women now free to enjoy mouth meat.

this is the (partially obscured) face of equality

By Ana

Good news! Those muffled moans you've been listening to all month are actually the sound of Japanese women taking an appreciative bite of out of their hamburgers... from behind a chastity muzzle. (So you can stop glaring at your neighbor every morning the elevator. Sorry, Mrs. Papadopoulos.)

According to Huffingtonpost, who probably won't mind that I borrowed one of their images,  this revolutionary East Asian dining accessory, is referred to as  the "Liberation Wrapper."  (Which, as it turns out, doesn't mean "condom," aaand might also explain why the Trinidadian guy at the gas station looked so confused.)

Instead its a type of napkin used to "cover a woman's face, thus "freeing" her to devour a burger without fear of exposing one of her germiest cavities to the world. (I assume they eat their beef raw too? ...Is something a racist or Alec Baldwin might say.)

According to Mr. Huffington, this creepy convention, brought on by the "trend known as “ochobo” --AKA having a "small and modest mouth" -- has caught on to the point where it's considered rude for women to flap their beaks in public. So when Japanese restaurant chain owners noticed a gender discrepancy in the sales of their large Classic Burger, they chalked it up to their female customers' adherence to cultural norms... Hence a need for the Liberation Wrapper. It all makes sense!

hey girl, why you covering up those fine lips?

And I thought I was oppressed for being a government sponsored infant carrier.

Am I pretty?

by Anči

Most of you are probably aware of the disturbing new You Tube trend, summed up by the phrase "Am I pretty or ugly?"

Just your average after-school activity

If you haven't heard of it, you can probably imagine what it involves. Basically it's an exercise in public humiliation, among(st) adolescent girls who... regularly  1) stare into a camera, and 2) ask the notoriously Noble-Hearted-You-Tube-Commenters to tell them whether they're pretty or ugly.  (I'm suddenly much less of ashamed of spending so much of my pubescent free-time interviewing celebrity-me in front of a mirror. "Did I feel a lot of pressure after being named one of  People's Most Beautiful? No, not really. I don't really focus on those things. Although it's always nice to be included.")
 If you've ever been on Youtube, you can probably imagine what the majority of the responses are like: (To those of you who wrote down "Dick pics captioned with an angry, misspelled request for fellatio," I'd say... That's a really specific answer.  And where are you writing that down?)

As expected, Bust reported  that "70 percent of the comments came from men. Not only were they highly derogatory in nature, but "most of them were definitely over 18.""

It was also pointed out that "The comments from females... were almost exclusively provided by the under-18 crowd," which paints a really creepy picture if you ask me.

Just the fact fact that the two primary contributors to this "trend," are underage girls, and grown men should tell you exactly which group benefits from the sexualization of young girls. And more importantly, which group it hurts the most.


Thoughts?

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

So I started watching "Girls"

By Anči

I know I'm a little late to the party here-- I only started watching "Girls" this past month.  (But that's because I take my show commitment's seriously, and I needed to finish processing Mad Men.)

Anyway we're not going to attempt an analyses or review here, because pretty much any observation I've made has already been unpacked on multiple blogs: the lack of people of color,  the amount of privilege written into the show, the quiet dignity of Lena Dunham's butt....

I do want however, to talk a bit about the reviews of the show--- some have been valid, but plenty have been startlingly unfair: The most infuriating charge being, that the characters on the show are immature, privileged and self-involved. Funny, you could say the exact same about Mad Men's Don Draper-- who is selfish, self-centered, wealthy, and on top of that an abusive alcoholic, raging misogynist, and pathological liar.
But unlike Dunham's alter ego Hannah Horvath, Draper also happens to be  charismatic, smooth and alpha-male enough to be forgiven for his shockingly shitty behavior. When Hannah acts self-involved (at the age of 24, compared to Draper's 40) we enjoy calling her out on it.  It's fun to snark on entitled bitches, isn't it? Especially if they also happen to be "fat."

This is what a real self-involved bitch looks like.

Draper on the other hand,  manipulates and berates everyone in his life in order to get his way...while maintaining his  identity as dapper, misunderstood, moody  and  "tortured" [boo hoo, I faked my entire identity, banged everyone's wife,  and now my life is really hard.]

Now I challenge you to find a single review that dreamily refers to Hannah as a "misunderstood tortured soul." Ten extra points for  additional  gushing adjectives like "mysterious." (You may not believe me, but Hannah Horvath is about exactly as mysterious as Don Draper: Why is she such a delicious mess of contradictions? It's a mystery.)

I'm not saying Hannah is a wonderful person. (Although frankly I like her, and I'd want to be friends with her. ) but the amount of backlash her character's been getting is starting to feel suspiciously gender-specific.  Because for all her flaws, the sheer amount of contempt and anger directed at this 24 year old white girl cannot possibly be justified. 

"I have my own show, a Golden Globe, and a book deal. What do you have, besides a prescription for Viagra??"

The biggest indicators of this misogynist girl-hate, were the ragey reactions to Hannah's fling with a character played by Patrick Wilson. In fact, Slate devoted an entire article to the episode... wherein two dudes expressed their mutual disgust and horror at the notion of a hot guy like Patrick Wilson wanting someone like Hannah Horvath. (a witty, adorable, sexually adventurous 24 year old? Blech!)

So time to unpack:

The article kicks off with the first injured reviewer whining: "Really, the whole thing left me baffled and uncomfortable. Why are these people having sex, when they are so clearly mismatched—in style, in looks..."

(Um, is this your first time watching TV? Are you really, that uncomfortable seeing a "mismatched" couple having sex? Did you react the same way when Mad Men's Roger married his 20 year old secretary - under much, much creepier circumstances?)

First reviewer then goes on to wonder: "Why is he kissing her and begging her to stay over?"
 (Oh I don't know, maybe because he's horny, he's attracted to her, and she seems to be willing?)

Second dude chimes in with a  version of "yeah, bro,"  stating: "Presumably there are things that Hannah would not, in any world that resembled our own, get. Such as Patrick Wilson, for instance."
(First of all beta boy, she's not banging Patrick Wilson,  she's banging his character Joshua, whom we know nothing about. And who are you to decide who Hannah can or can't get? Maybe she couldn't get you, (such a big loss for her, I know.) But I'm pretty sure you don't speak for every person in the world.)

Then we're back to First dude, who  procedes to call our Hannah out for being "Sexually ungenerous" (because, when a girl like that gets the opportunity to sleep with a hot guy, she needs to act gratefully  subservient, right?) His bases for this assessment is the awesome moment wherein Hannah tells Joshua "“no, make me come."(in response to his instructing her to "make [him] come" first. ) So its ungenerous when Hannah throws his original command back in his face? What if she had gone with it, would that have made Patrick Wilson's character sexually ungenerous? Also haven't these "reviewers" ever heard of sexual teasing, and power play? Lighten up, bros!

My favorite moment in this exchange comes next, when first dude brands Hannah "Defiantly ungraceful." aaaand queue the gaydar.
Okay, maybe its unfair to speculate about this guy's sexuality-- but if he can only get hot for a graceful black swan, then maybe.... he's not really into the ladies? All I'm saying is that If he had ever slept with a girl  he'd know that we don't spend our time waltzing around like flowers. We have belly fat that folds over when we sit, and sometimes we go days without putting on a shirt. (You're welcome.)


Questions?

Unworthy, and unbeautiful: How I navigate feminism and femininity

 By Anči

As a feminist well versed in the oppressive lies of ‘the beauty myth,’ it’s a challenge to reconcile my hostility toward this particularly damaging social construct, with my enthusiastic participation in its many rituals. Yes it’s true:  I’m a feminist  who performs beauty.

And that’s what beauty is: a performance.  More than that, though it’s an investment… which in my case, means shelling out big bucks on skin products, laser hair removal treatments, (my nickname in 8^th grade was “unibrow,”) and of course makeup!

For the most part, I enjoy the process—  It feels gratifying and even luxurious to spend time painting and  adorning myself . I like the way mascara makes my eyes pop; and for special events, I might also bring out the eyeliner,  or some  blush. (Because how else would everyone know how seriously I take their Office Christmas Party? )

Putting myself together always brings on that familiar, satisfied relief that accompanies any patriarchy-approved transformation.  Every woman is familiar with the affirmation that ensues the moment we snap our makeup mirrors shut.  It says ‘Now I am presentable. Now I am deserving of respect.’

This is obviously a deeply problematic assessment to make—one that equates worth and humanity with looks. It’s also an attitude we’ve been taught since childhood. I recall being told many times as girl, that putting effort into my appearance is what  tells the world that I respect myself.  (Up until then, I hadn’t realized that my sacred self-respect boiled down to whether or not I had plucked my eyebrows that day.)

Of course, attempting to gauge the opinion a person has of herself, based on how polished she looks, is ridiculous. (And petty. And judgemental. ) After all, I am at my most confident when  I’m  writing , and believe me when I tell you I am neither plucked, nor matching right now.

So how can I keep  participating  in the global deception that is “beauty,” when I am so painfully aware of its effects on women?

The answer is complicated.

 For  many women, complying with beauty standards is a question of social survival.  In a world where being ‘unattractive ‘ translates into being invisible, beauty performance  can serve as a weapon against the isolation, dismissal and contempt reserved for the unbeautiful. If you don’t believe me, consider this: In July, when I got a flat tire, and emerged from my car in heels and a dress, I was instantly surrounded by concerned, helpful men, eager to change my tire, and give me rides. Then consider the number of times you’ve walked past a homeless person, in even graver need of assistance.  The difference is simple: In the first case, my appearance conveyed enough status to warrant care, and  attention, while in  the homeless man’s case, his appearance undermined him, rendering him invisible, and undeserving of empathy.

Beauty  performance is more often an act of survival,  than it is an indicator of selfishness. Often times, it is simply a gesture of appeasement--  a way to placate the male gaze, and reassure a male dominated society of peaceful compliance.  ‘See? We’re playing along. Your precious power structure is still intact.’

Of course, nobody applies makeup with the conscious intent of exhibiting status, or placating patriarchy.  Most of the time makeup feels like girly fun— for me it’s a tool for self expression,  a way to be creative!  I’m certainly not  trying to imply that women who perform beauty are weak, pitiful creatures.  We are complex, human beings, reacting to, and evolving with our environment.

I want to make it clear that the intent of this post was never to shame feminine women , but rather to deconstruct the significance of their actions.  If feminism has taught us anything, it’s that the personal is political, and that whether or not we mean to be sending a message, every single one of our actions reflects and establishes our norms and values.

What does beauty mean to you?