What’s Up with the Super Skinny Demonic Pregnancy in “Breaking Dawn”?

kristen-stewart-bella-pregnant-breaking-dawn

By Sayantani DasGupta

If you have been, say, living in outer space, in some kind of a no-media cult, or simply in possession of particularly discriminating taste, and have not seen the Twilight films, or read Stephanie Meyer’s books, then, before you read this post, I respectfully send you to these superlative examples of feline scholarship otherwise known as the LOL cat reviews of the Twilight films.

For the rest of the population, read on.

A gender studies professor and a religious studies scholar went into a darkened movie theater earlier this fall and saw a film about pseudo-Mormon vampire families, oral demonic C-sections, and baby-werewolf imprinting. No, that’s not a joke, although by the time the film ended, my religious studies professor friend and I kind of wished it was, too. (Now, if you know about Twilight but haven’t seen Breaking Dawn (part 1), or have seen it, but blocked it out with a self-inflicted lobotomy – excellent choice btw, I respectfully send you to this naughty but oh-so-clevah summary of the movie at g4tv.)

Now, plenty has been written about the Mormon influences in the Twilight books, including the juxtaposition of the ‘white and delightsome’ sparkly vampire Cullen family with the indigenous “savage werewolves in need of vampire colonization.” (At the very least, that Jacob kid needs someone to buy him a shirt, already.) And there’s been an equal amount written about Bella as swooning anti-feminist heroine, whose ‘choices’ are more often than not the ‘choice’ to be passive and, um, whiney. (As the LOL cats would say, “Uh-oh. my only raison for to lives, gones. *Mope so sad. I jes stare out windo for thfree monz.”)

Now that Breaking Dawn (parte uno) has finally brought the clumsy but deliciously ensangrinated human Bella (that’s like, something European for ‘beautiful’, did you know that?) and breathtakingly glowy vampire dude Edward (a 107-year-old un-dead guy as your high school biology lab partner, no that’s not creepy at all) to the altar, nuptial bed, and super-disturbing at-home baby delivery table, there has been some wonderful feminist analyses of the essentially anti-choice ‘choice’ rhetoric peppered through the film.

After Bella gets pregnant (‘natch) like the second she says, “I do,” she embraces the “choice” to give birth to her demon spawn – despite Edward, Alice, and every other thinking person in the audience’s urgings to have an abortion. In fact, she employs grumpy blonde Cullen sister Rosalie to serve as a sort of anti-abortion protester cum bodyguard – protecting Bella’s rapidly swelling body from the (sensible) pro-choice machinations of, um, everybody else. Despite looking like she’s a hunger striker with a strapped on baby bump that she stole from the dressing room of “A Pea in the Pod,” Bella is determined to play the dutiful mother-to-be who “loves” her fetal monstrosity far more than herself (even when that love involves delicately sipping human blood through a non-environmentally friendly Styrofoam cup + straw).

Now, the grotesque pregnancy and birth scenes in Breaking Dawn are consistent with recent cultural obsessions with horrible images of pregnancy and birth on television.  Bella’s bun is also consistent with historical notions of “monstrous pregnancies” caused by overworkings of the maternal imagination, as well as the “pregnancy/birth pornography” indulged in by many recent dramas about historical figures. In the words of Bitch Magazine blogger Katherine Don:

Nothing instills a fear of pregnancy more than watching childbirth scenes that take place during the Medieval period… or the Renaissance… or during the Enlightenment… or any time, really, before the twentieth century. Screaming mistresses/courtesans/queens/princesses lay flushed in their canopied doily beds as frantic women flutter about the room, dipping cloths in hot water…

Don’t get me wrong—I’m not downplaying the potential dangers of childbirth. But exaggerating, fetishizing and sexualizing these dangers for entertainment purposes amounts, in my opinion, to some form of pornographication.

But I knew all this before I went to the movie theater. And yet, although I might have come for the reproductive politics, I ended up staying for the messed up body image shizz. As the “Ryan Gosling Reads YA… and sometimes cries” meme would say, it was super messed up to watch a young girl wake up from her wedding night covered in bruises – and then watch her be okay with it. But that too I knew going in, as I knew that there would be a homebirth scene from hell in which Edward actually BITES OUT the baby from bloody Bella’s belly (that scene was so gross, yo, I totally earned that alliteration.)

Yet, what I found most disturbing of all – among many, many other disturbing things including Jacob falling in love with Bella’s newborn baby Renesmee  (yeah, really, both the wacky name and the falling in love with an infant bit)– was the visual image of Bella as anorexic pregnant waif queen. As Alex Cranz at FemPop notes, skeenay Kristin Stewart could have given Christian Bale a run for his money with her degree of emaciated-ness and poking out bones in this film. I knew, from reading the books, that Bella’s ravenous half-vampire fetus devours her from the inside out, yet, the image of a young actress looking that haggard on screen was downright shocking (and I’m sure triggering for those in the audience suffering from disordered eating). For a minute I actually got confused, and thought that maybe I was watching a film version of Laurie Halsie Anderson’s novel about anorexia, Wintergirls (Kristin Stewart acts in the film version of Anderson’s Speak.)

Feminist scholar/rock star Judith Butler has asserted that gender is performance, not an innate state of being but a set of repeated, stylized acts. With that in mind, we can also assert that pregnancy is a type of ‘performance.’ We only have to think of different ways that pregnancy is publicly enacted in different cultures, or think of the different ways that pregnancy has been presented historically (hidden utterly, infantilized – remember those maternity dresses with the big goofy bows? – and most recently, made Hollywood sexy) to realize that pregnancy is not solely a biological condition of being, but fundamentally socioculturally constructed.

Yet, although the ‘belly bump’ has become a greatly desired accountremont for celebrities in the last few decades, this has not relieved these women from adhering to and promoting unrealistic and unattainable body standards. Indeed, the ‘celebrification’ of pregnancy has in fact brought the gestating body further under the exacting gaze of feminine body image expectations. Actress and model mothers are regularly photographed with bellies that seem practically glued on, raving about the diet and exercise regimen they will embark on to regain their ‘pre-baby bikini bodies’ as soon as possible. Recently, Mariah Carey famously hid her “rancid” pregnant body from her husband – even in the bathtub – and quickly became the newest Jenny Craig spokesperson after delivering. And it’s not just pregnant celebrities in on the head trip. We’ve all read about adult women who have had their teenage bouts with anorexia re-triggered by the inevitable (and healthy) weight gain and body changes of pregnancy. Sensationally called “pregorexia’ – such women are unable to reconcile the disordered body image expectations of our society with the necessities of pregnancy, and starve, exercise, and otherwise abuse their pregnant bodies to the detriment of their own and their fetus’ health.

Kristin Stewart’s performance of pregnancy is inevitably also a performance of “pregorexia” – adding one more image of extreme thinness to our cultural stockpile of such images. Demon-baby or no, ultrathin pregnant bodies are culturally unhealthy, images that devour us all from the inside out.

Other Pregnancy Related Posts on Adios Barbie:

Newest Diet Fad Offers False Positive

The Skinny on Pregnancy Weight Gain

 

Post to Twitter

Disfigurement: Isolating ‘Imperfect’ Bodies

Shirin Juwaley

Shirin Juwaley of Palash Foundation, an organisation dedicated to the rehabilitation of people with disfigurement, explains how disfigurement affects the lives of women.

Originally published at Women’s Web. Cross-posted with permission.

By Shirin Juwaley

Having a facial disfigurement, according to me, is an advantage! It has sieved out the people in my life as only the significant remain. In the 13 years of surviving an acid attack by my ex-husband, I have come across all sorts of attitudes and behaviours towards a deviant face.

Justifying and accepting discrimination

I often wonder why most people cringe, repel, flinch, stare, avert their gaze and feel awkward in their interactions with people with disfigurement. To cite a few examples, Deepa.S*, 25, decided to burn up as she was fed up of living a life not meeting her expectations. This wife and mother of a one year old survived and suffers extreme contractures. Her chin and neck are fused with scarring all over her body. Let’s face it; her physical symmetry has gone askew. This mother prefers to isolate herself in a dingy house with no electricity and water, as fetching food would mean the neighbours cringing and fearfully closing their doors. This means Deepa is willing to go thirsty and hungry rather than step out in a community that is obviously uncomfortable with her physical appearances.

In a country [India] where leprosy is still considered a curse from God, where social discrimination is based on colour, where girls of marriageable age are encouraged to go through great lengths to be visually acceptable, fearing the visually deviant holds no surprise. What is interesting though, is that Deepa herself conforms to these ideas of beauty and finds the reaction of her neighbours justifiable. Many women in the lower socio-economic class resort to burning as an answer to their troubles not realising that this will only add to their woes if they survive. Since fire is considered to be engulfing and easily accessible to women, 80% of burn cases are women and children.

Shanti.K*, 30, was burnt by her in-laws as she was childless three years into her marriage. She survived with her skin on her face and body badly twisted and stretched leaving her looking deviant. She wears a scarf around her facial disfigurement and hides her scars with clothes covering her fully so that ‘others’ are comfortable around her. She runs into a fit of anger if a man passes the comment “Who will be with someone like you? (Teray jaisee kay saath kaun rahega?)” as it affirms that she is not beautiful and hence not acceptable. She has few friends and does not like to socialize, which is much against the carefree person she was before getting burnt. Marriage or even relationships according to her are both impossible and not even a distant dream.

The perfect, unattainable body

Both Deepa and Shanti are accepting of their discrimination as they don’t know otherwise. The social indoctrination around physical appearances, especially for a woman, starts as soon as she is born. The messages floating around are so strong, be it in the stories we are told, the movies we watch, the clothes we wear, religious significance, customs to be adhered, compliments/comments we receive, comparisons made with siblings and cousins – the list is probably endless, shape our thinking. The visual impact of media has pushed 98% of the ‘normal’ population to ape the 2% population of ‘perfect’ bodies displayed in glossy magazines and hoardings.

For Anamika.M*, who was born congenitally disfigured, growing up with no legs was traumatic. Children around her played and ran while she stood in one place, helpless. She was considered as a ‘kaccha limbu’/invalid and rejected for not being ‘normal’. The trauma of growing up was magnified, as fitting in became the only goal. Anamika made concentrated efforts to look pretty to compensate for her feet.

There are thousands of people with disfigurement living in Mumbai alone but the probability of meeting these thousands is reduced to one in a month. I wonder, why is the ratio so abnormally imbalanced? The answers over the years have evolved into more questions.

The paramount importance given to ideals of physical appearances, mostly for women, has secluded a certain section of society that does not fit into the mould of beauty or ‘normalcy’.

Deviant looking bodies (disfigurement) have been enshrouded with myth, religious beliefs and fear causing disruption in attitudes and behaviour. Disfigurement is defined as an altered physical appearance which can be congenital, due to accidents, burn injuries, surgical intervention, skin deformities, illnesses or any other reason. Hence disfigurement, though not a physical liability, creates a disabling impact due to social prejudices and apathy by society, particularly for a woman, as she is overburdened with expectations of being a perfect (socially acceptable) daughter, a wife and mother.

We at Palash Foundation deal with these core issues of accepting differences. Our core programme addresses social reintegration and livelihoods for people with disfigurement. We currently work along with the social work department of LTMG (Sion) and Kasturba Hospital in Mumbai with burn survivors and their caretakers and simultaneously conduct sensitisation and awareness talks to different groups of people on disfigurement. To know more visit www.palashfoundation.org

*Names changed on request to protect privacy. 

About The Author: Shirin Juwaley, 37, is an acid attack survivor. She is the Founder, Director of Palash Foundation, an organisation that strives to create an inclusive world where the rights of people with disfigurement are respected and protected. She has worked extensively on different projects in the social sector for the last 9 years.


Post to Twitter

PETA and Porn: Exploit Women, Not Animals

PETA ad featuring Pamela Anderson that was banned by the city of Montreal in 2010 for being sexist.

PETA ad featuring Pamela Anderson that was banned by the city of Montreal in 2010 for being sexist.

By Ashley-Michelle Papon

Just in time for the chill of the holidays, the marketing wizards at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have come up with a new way to keep converts to animal welfarism warm. Within the next month, PETA will capitalize on their previously raunchy skin campaigns with a companion porn site. The porn site, PETA.XXX, will showcase plenty of celebrities willing to bare all, but according to Lindsay Rajt, PETA’s associate director of campaigns, the site will also feature displays of what PETA considers animal abuse. “We’re hoping to reach a whole new audience of people, some of whom will be shocked by graphic images that maybe they didn’t anticipate seeing when they went to the PETA triple-X site,” Rajt said.

From billboards preying on insecurities about swimsuit season as a method of somehow saving whales to advertisements suggesting your real concern during airport body scans should be how hot your vegetarian body looks, the idea that PETA could still manage to shock anyone is worthy of a laugh. Or two. Though the artwork from ad to ad differs, the message is overwhelmingly the same: learn to respect the welfare of animals, while disrespecting that of people.

In other words, a porn site featuring juxtapositions of animal abuse images isn’t a new low; it’s exactly the type of half-baked tasteless trafficking that we should be expecting from PETA. As a countless number of galleries–including this one by Time magazine–highlight, PETA’s co-founder Ingrid Newkirk long ago made the conscientious choice that the best way to sell her message would be through exploiting women, and she does it because it works, sticking to her philosophy that PETA is obligated to serve as “press sluts” to bring attention to their cause.

And stick to it, she does. Newkirk is, after all, the same woman who famously wrote to Yasser Arafat, urging him to keep animals out of conflicts with Israel after a donkey died during a suicide bombing. No such request for the then-prime minister to condemn “honor killings” such as bride burning and female infanticide, which accounted for a full two-thirds of all killings within Palestine territories at the time, reflecting PETA’s less charitable view of women’s expendability in general.

Not to mention PETA’s emphasis that a woman’s value is strictly in how her body looks. Fat-phobia has been PETA’s old trusty in the arsenal long before the “Save the Whales” campaign. Ideally, PETA shouldn’t care what a body looks like, provided that the body is simply sustained by a vegetarian diet and vegan living. In actuality, they know that if there is anything our patriarchal society reviles more than women in general, it’s women of size, and preying on those cultural prejudices has been a source of great media attention, which normalizes the violence visited on those same bodies.

Of course, this cavalier dismissal of violence against humans (specifically, women) is the real problem with PETA’s approach to activism. In 2002, PETA filmed a would-be Super Bowl commercial, which depicted a group of hooligans beating a woman to death with a baseball bat to the caption of, “What if you were killed for your coat?” Though the commercial was banned from airing, just last year PETA turned up the heat (and the fake blood) to launch their “Meat is Murder” basics, placing humans in life-sized deli counter meat packages and cellophane. The gag might have been somewhat educational, if the models hadn’t looked as though they’d just come out of Jeffrey Dahmer’s freezer.

That joke might seem to be in bad taste (no pun intended) until you consider that the serial killer’s cannibalism has been the fodder of more than one advertisement and celebrity-targeted criticism. No, seriously. But Dahmer’s crimes aren’t the only ones that PETA finds acceptable to dovetail into their agenda. In 2008, PETA created an ad identical to their 1991 Dahmer special in response to the Manitoba Greyhound bus beheading, asking people to imagine the terror of victim Tim McLean and use it as motivation to “leave violence off of their dinner plates.”

However, the argument here isn’t that the decision to launch a porn website is continuing PETA’s legacy of playing up violence to make a point. Although feminists often disagree as to how empowering or violent pornography inherently is, what makes this particular venture par for the course is PETA’s decision to include images of animal torture. It’s a veritable buffet of -isms for the organization, with the unintended consequence of eroticizing the torture of animals.

Part of what makes PETA’s performance so frustrating is that they should know better. Their website contains a lengthy explanation about the correlation between people who abuse animals and violent behavior towards other human beings, suggesting that on some level, somebody in that organization should understand the intersectionality of subjugation for women and the animal kingdom.

More to the point, promoting misogyny—often, violent—with the end result of animal liberation makes about as much sense as using racism to end class politics. You’ll capture some headlines, but you’ll probably alienate more people than you galvanize, especially since people likely to be more sympathetic to animal causes tend to also be against the idea of exploiting women.

It goes without saying that there are plenty of reasons to care about the treatment of animals in this country and elsewhere. Any enlightened, progressive individual has to acknowledge that our experience is largely shaped by what we consume, and that includes consuming the animal community. But responsibility goes both ways, especially when we’re talking about oppression of marginalized classes like animals. For real change to happen, PETA has got to stop objectifying women to nothing more than literal pieces of meat.

* * *

Read other Adios Barbie content related to the eroticized violence of women:

A Monster Success! (reports on our successful petition against the official release of Kanye West’s misogynistic “Monster” video)

Deconstructing Kanye’s “Monster”


Post to Twitter

Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Playboy, Porn, and Pole Dancing

TBD-NEWS-20-5-8-PLAYBOY2.jpg

By Sheena Vasani

“Would you rather have brains or beauty?”

“Beauty,” replies the Miss University London beauty pageant contestant adding because if she weren’t beautiful “nobody would want to listen to her anyway.”

Should we assume this quote came from newspaper archives, maybe from the 50s? Unfortunately not. The Guardian included this quote as part of a story reporting on the growing trend of UK university beauty pageants in December 2008.

Take a closer look and a disturbing pattern emerges.

The Guardian reported in 2006 that one of the UK’s leading retail groups WH Smith, reported its Playboy stationery line as one of its best-selling of all time. Ironically, its popularity lay not with boys, but adolescent girls. And while the BBC reports that WH Smith has since withdrawn these products, shops like Wet Seal in America still sell clothes promoting the Playboy bunny brand to teenage girls. Numerous large retail stores in both the UK and US sell inappropriate sexy clothing for children that many parents actually buy. Reports indicate the female public figure many American teenage girls look up to is Paris Hilton, well-known for her sex tape and rich father. And then I discovered that Brown University offers pole-dancing competitions, as does Cambridge University.

That’s right, folks. Forty years after feminism’s second wave burst onto the scene, 40 years after female activists burned bras, and 40 years AFTER Gloria Steinem went undercover as a Playboy Bunny to expose the misogyny involved in that world, women have gone from being viewed as sexual objects to – you guessed it! – still being perceived as sexual objects, whose only real accomplishment and source of power lies in their lust-provoking abilities.

Now, don’t get me wrong. The second wave was about empowering women, destroying the ideology running rampant stating a woman’s sole purpose was to sexually please men. In many, many respects, it succeeded. Women received more opportunities to shine than their mothers, particularly in the workplace. According to the U.S. Department of Labor data from 2009, women held “49.8 percent of all jobs, their highest proportion in history.”

But if a beauty pageant contestant from one of the best university systems in the world admits her looks are more important than her brain, if young girls feel the pressure to look sexy that they purchase the likes of pole dancing kits, what is this saying about female liberation and gender equality?

Sadly, some women are also encouraging such choices, celebrating it as “post-feminism.” As Christie Hefner, Playboy CEO and daughter to Playboy founder Hugh Hefner explains, “the post-women’s movement generation has just a more grown up, comfortable, natural attitude about sex and sexiness that is more in line with where guys were a couple of generations before.”[i]

So, the oppression of females through sexual means by men back then was not so much a human rights violation as it was actually a portrayal of male enlightenment, and now that we slow and insecure females understand this we are reverting back to objectifying ourselves?

I’m all for sexual expression and liberation, and if participating in pornography or pole dancing satisfies you, then fair enough. But the fact is many women involved in pornography describe their experiences as unfulfilling, as the famous memoirs of Traci Lords and Jenna Jameson show. Yes, Jameson might be quick to promote the pornography industry, but one has to wonder why she also says if she ever had a daughter, “she would lock her in the house before she’d let her get involved in the sex industry”?[ii]

Not to mention, many women are drawn to the adult entertainment industry out of financial or emotional problems, often resulting from sexual abuse. Both Traci Lords and Jameson’s personal stories speak of childhoods or teenage years filled with trauma. As Mary Anne Layden, Ph.D., and Director for Women’s Psychological Health in Philadelphia states:

“Most strippers, as with other women who work in the sex industry, are adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Research indicates the number is between 60%-80%. …Often as adults they reenact their childhood trauma by working as strippers, Playboy models, and prostitutes. The men who, now as customers, physically and visually invade the adult women’s bodies, reenact the role of the perpetrator. These women work in the sex industry because it feels like home.”

And what about the women who don’t work in the sex industry but want to associate themselves with Playboy and pole dancing? I don’t buy that this is genuine sexual liberation. It’s still about pleasing men.

Perhaps this happened because we grew overwhelmed with the impossibly hard to reach standards of beauty laid out for us by the images of airbrushed, artificially altered beauties? Perhaps we fell for the underlying message of ads flaunting such photos, that we are simply sex objects, who are only to be seen? Or maybe we just became tired of pointing out the objectification of women only to be dismissed, called prudes? Instead, we convinced ourselves life would just be “easier” if we repressed our anger and lived in denial? After all, who wants to be perceived as insecure and undesirable, especially to men? Whatever the reason, in an ironic move to feel “empowered” and wanted, instead of beating our oppressors, we are sadly joining them.

Next time you fantasize about being a Playboy bunny, feel pressured to visit a strip club even though you’re heterosexual, or to take up pole-dancing classes, remember the words of Susan Brownmiller, one of the most involved members of the real women’s liberation movement in the 70s: “You think you’re being brave, you think you’re being sexy, you think you’re transcending feminism. But that’s bullshit.”[iii]

Women of the West the battle still wages. Let’s join forces and get our acts together, lest we run the risk of selling out.

 

 


[i] Levy, Ariel. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture (London: Simon & Schuster, 2005) 39.

[ii] Levy, Ariel. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture (London: Simon & Schuster, 2005) 183.

[iii] Levy, Ariel. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture (London: Simon & Schuster, 2005) 82.

 

Post to Twitter

The Naked Clam and Other Preposterous Pubic Hair Problems

http://flic.kr/p/a6TRRX

By Quinn Davis

Vaginas and vulvas are confusing enough without pubes. Even though we’ve all got them, we end up feeling like we have way more hair down there than we should. It’s easy to see why; in magazines, on MTV, and pretty much everywhere else in the world where it’s PC to show the bikini line, the mass waxification – and Photoshopification – of women has led us all to feel like we’re secret yetis.

There’s a reason we have pubic hair. It protects our genitals, which, considering how much crap they have to go through, it’s a legit job. And yet when the words “products for removing” are typed into Google, the first suggestion good ‘ole Google has for us is “products for removing pubic hair.”

Before I sound like judgemaster flex over here, I need to admit something: I am currently going through the process of laser hair removal. Yes I, feminist that I am, have gone thrice now to have some machine from the future suck at my skin and zap my evolutionarily fit bikini line.

I could give you all the reasons in the world why I’m doing this, but it doesn’t matter, does it? I was damned because I didn’t and now I’m damned because I’m doing. I was ashamed of the tiny red bumps from hell I got from shaving that trotted next to my underwear, and now I’m ashamed that I’m doing something about it to be more aesthetically pleasing and, well, less painful.

I think it must have started on the bus.

“Do you shave your beaver?” a greasy-yet-popular boy asked me on the bus. His friends, two other popular boys, sat a few seats back, giggling and waiting for my answer. I was 14.

As far as I knew, I didn’t even have a beaver, and I wasn’t sure why I would want to shave one in the first place. Aren’t their pelts waterproof?

After a few more questions of similar nature, I got the gist of their query and was completely horrified.

“No! Why, why would I do that?!” I asked. All I got back was a shrug and a look that told me that if I didn’t get rid of all of the hair I had down there, no boy would ever be interested. Besides, the thing probably smells like fish anyway.

At 14 years old, I highly doubt that these boys had ever really seen a vulva – at least not in real life. But you know what they did see? Porn, their moms’ Victoria’s Secret catalogs, and pretty much everything else you can think of that a pubescent boy would use to, um, squeak one out.

So, in ninth grade, it was suddenly my responsibility to become that image for them. I blame them for sexually harassing me, yes, but rape culture and the media’s presentation of a “normal” woman did the rest.

Dear World: 14 years old = child! It’s not cool for women to feel like they have to change the way their genitals look, let alone someone that is two years too young to get her driver’s license.

Later, in college, I had a boyfriend that requested that I shave the whole thing all the time, even though it made my vulva flame up like an irritated puffer fish. His interest in the idea was amazingly creeptastic. Um, isn’t it good enough that I have, y’know, the plumbing you like?

But of course, I didn’t think those things at the time. Instead of trusting my instinct (which would have provided him with a swift kick to the rest of his family tree – besides, evolutionarily fit men want bush!), I bought into the pressure, trying different razors, creams, gels, and waxing. It all hurt, it rarely looked good – and yet I still tried to please him.

Women are told every day that their genitals are disgusting, and the critics range from prepubescent boys and the media to female friends and our own mothers. You’re lucky if you get close enough to even see the thing before we snap our legs shut out of terror that you’ll see a hairport instead of, well, us.

Yes, both men and women should feel free to express their sexual wishes. However, we have to take into account whether or not those wishes would, or even might, be harmful to our significant others. The person I was with never considered the psychological repercussions that such a suggestion – nay, requirement – might have had on me, never mind the physical effects.

He also managed to gloss over the obvious pain I was in after my dupa pulled a Britney circa 2008. I mean really, what would you think was going on if your girlfriend was walking around like a bowlegged man waiting for his balls to drop? Newsflash: It means things are going pretty rough for the muff.

I’ve given up on the naked clam look (and that winner I was dating), choosing to laser my bikini line alone, but I still worry that the hair is too long, too thick, too short. There’s also the shame that surrounds even talking about it. I mean really, how many times have you sat down and had a conversation with another woman about what your pubic hair looks like?

If you have, congratulations. Now shut up and go get a Brazilian.

Related content:

Period Panties & Body Shame: An OCD Journey Through My Underwear Drawer

A Place for Me: Art, Porn, Feminism, and Race

Sex, My Body and Giving it Up

Post to Twitter

To BE or To Be Looked At?

Norman Rockwell's "Girl at the Mirror"

By Lexie Kite at BeautyRedefined.net; Cross-posted with permission.

 

Norman Rockwell's "Girl at the Mirror"

You are capable of much more than being looked at.

Have you thought about this statement? Do you understand the gravity of it? This was the first of the four messages Lindsay and I carefully chose for our billboard campaign going up in June, and it gave me goosebumps when I let it sink in. Women are always being looked at. And when we aren’t being looked at, we are too often envisioning ourselves being looked at, as if an outsider’s perspective has become our own. In fact, our work makes one thing very clear: Part of growing up female today means learning to view oneself from another’s gaze.

Ever heard this quote? Men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at. This determines not only most relations between men and women but also the relation of women to themselves. The surveyor of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female. Thus she turns herself into an object—and most particularly an object of vision: a sight. (John Berger, Ways of Seeing, 1977).

This insightful man was referring to the idea of “objectification,” which we’ve all heard once or twice. But when we think of the term, we probably think of sexualized female bodies, or sexualized parts of female bodies…which isn’t the whole idea here. When we understand the whole of objectification, we can better grasp the role it plays in our daily lives and the ways it may keep us from fulfilling all we want to do with our days. When we travel around giving our one-hour Beauty Redefined visual presentation, we explain to our audiences that objectification takes on many roles:

Say you’re walking down the sidewalk on a beautiful day. Someone who has internalized an outsider’s perspective of herself will often spend more time adjusting her clothing or hair, wondering what other people are thinking of her, judging the shape of her shadow or reflection in a window, etc. She will picture herself walking – she literally turns herself into an object of vision – instead of enjoying the sunny weather, looking around, thinking about anything else, etc. If you find yourself the victim of this type of activity, you aren’t alone. In fact, you are just one of millions of females growing up in a world that teaches us to survey ourselves every waking moment. Profit-driven media tells us how we can “Look Hotter From Behind!” in fitness magazines, “Look Wow Now!” on makeover shows every hour of every day, “Look 10 Years Younger!” using every anti-aging procedure and product under the sun. Notice the emphasis on looking…Do you find you survey yourself as you move through life? That you ever turn yourself into an object of vision: a sight?

You are capable of much more than being looked at. Do you know who you are? Have you grasped the powerful role you can play in a world so badly in need of your unique talents, wisdom, and light? Are you aware of your unique mission at this point in your life? You’ve got something great to do, that only you can do. And if you are here to be looked at, to appear, to survey yourself instead of do an inspirational work that only you can do, you are not fulfilling your mission. Cheesy? Yes. True? Oh yes. More true than you know.

I see objectification playing out in my own life in many ways. Here are two: When I’m walking past people, I always imagine what I look like to them – from the front and from behind – and think irrational thoughts about what the people walking behind me or past me think about me. I often adjust my clothing to what I assume is the most flattering position as I walk. I can admit I’ve been known to look at my own Facebook profile to see what I look like to the cute guy who just added me or the friend I just added. I look through my photos and try to gauge my looks from the perspective of someone who is not me. If that isn’t self objectification, I don’t know what is! Tell me I’m not alone in doing this…?  I am a body image activist and I’m getting a Ph.D. in research on self-objectification, yet I still spend time envisioning myself from an outsider’s perspective instead of moving on to so many things more meaningful and productive. This just goes to show it’s a constant battle. I am constantly working to remind myself I’m capable of much more than being looked at. My self-objectification is complicated by the fact that I am an identical twin, so in some ways I see a body of a person with identical DNA in real life in a way that most people cannot experience. Unless you have an identical counterpart, your vision of yourself comes from photos, videos, and your two-dimensional reflection.

So let’s talk about mirrors, shall we? Even as I sit in my bedroom typing at 2 a.m., I see a full-length mirror peeking through the closet door, one with hooks hanging all my jewelry, five small decorative mirrors, and an IKEA centerpiece mirror above my bed. While I don’t think I’m necessarily vain or image-obsessed, I spend 45 minutes in front of the mirror every morning, keep a compact in my purse at all times, and apparently have about 100 in my room for safe keeping. I am surveying an image of myself for at least one of the 24 hours in my day, and imagining that image of myself as I move throughout my day. What role do mirrors play in your life? “Women are constantly being looked at. Even when we’re not, we’re so hyperaware of the possibility of being looked at that it can rule even our most private lives. Including in front of our mirrors, alone,” says Autumn Whitfield-Madrano at her always inspirational website, The Beheld.

The thought-provoking Autumn is currently undergoing an experiment which I cannot deny reflecting upon: A month-long break from mirrors. Thirty-one days of no mirrors, store windows, shiny pots, spoons, or the dark glass of the NYC subway she rides daily. In her own words: There’s nothing wrong with looking in the mirror. There’s nothing wrong with sometimes looking to your reflection—even when it is impossibly subjective, and backward at that—for a breath of fortitude, centeredness, and assurance. I just want to see what life is like when I’m not using that image as my anchor; I want to see how it affects the way I move through the world, the way I regard myself and others. I want to know what it’s like to sever a primary tie to one of my greatest personal flaws—extraordinary self-consciousness—and I want to discover what will fill the space that the mirror has occupied until now.

She goes on:  Sometimes I look in the mirror and see myself, or whatever I understand myself to be. Other times, I distinctly see an image of myself. When I see my image reflected on a mirror behind a bar I think, Oh good, I look like a woman who is having a good time out with friends. Or I’ll see my reflection in a darkened windowpane, hunched over my computer with a pencil twirled through my upswept hair, and I’ll think, My, don’t I look like a writer? You’ll notice what these have in common: My thoughts upon seeing my reflection are both self-centered and distant. I’m seeing myself, but not really—I’m seeing a woman who looks like she’s having a good time, or a writer, etc.

Autumn’s insights echo Berger’s powerful words. Too often, we travel through life with an outsider’s vision of ourselves. We are to be looked at. We watch ourselves being looked at. We become objects of vision: sights. But isn’t there so much more to life than watching ourselves self-consciously stroll through it? Life is beautiful when you live it – really experience it – not when you are more concerned about appearing beautiful as you try to live. When you think of your happiest times, were they in front of the mirror? Were you happiest when you were working to appear happy or attractive or beautiful to others? Happiness and beauty come from doing, acting, being – outside the confines of being looked at. So, today, what will you do to shake off the outsider’s gaze you envision of yourself? Will you do as Autumn has done and experiment with what your life becomes when you spend less time with your reflection and more time doing, acting, and being? Will you enjoy the world around you instead of hoping others are enjoying their view of you? Will you do something your self-policing outsider’s gaze kept you from doing before – like speak in front of a group of people? Run without worrying about the jiggle? Go to the store without your makeup on?

Today is the day to remember you are capable of much more than being looked at. And when you begin to realize that, you can start realizing the power of your abilities and the good you can do in a world so desperately in need of you. NOT a vision of you, but ALL of you.  What will you find you are capable of?

Post to Twitter

Standing with Sluts

slut

By Hugo Schwyzer

On April 3rd, 2011, the world’s first “Slut Walk” took place on the chilly streets of Toronto, Canada. The official site is here. The march was organized in response to the infuriating remarks of a police constable, who told a safety workshop at a Canadian university that “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.” (The officer has apologized, but it’s evident that his trogolodytic view of sex and responsibility remains widely held.)

I’ve written many times in support of women’s right to wear what they want in public without fear of harassment or harm. This includes both revealing and concealing clothing; I’ve written in favor of the right to go topless in public and in opposition to bans on headscarves and burqas.

There are so many things that trouble me about the obsession with regulating women’s bodies. But as a man, I am particularly exasperated at the assumption that lies beneath the insistence on modesty: the myth that men cannot control themselves. As feminists often point out, the real “man-haters” are those who promote modest dress for women out of the belief that men lack self-control. There is nothing more contemptuous than the suggestion that those of us with penises and Y chromosomes are prisoners of our biology, liable to rape or commit infidelity at the first sign of cleavage. The myth of male weakness sells us woefully, heartbreakingly short.

I honor SlutWalk for many reasons. But I appreciate one assumption that the organizers made in particular. Though what constitutes “slutty” clothing is obviously open to debate, SlutWalkers believe in men’s capacity to do two things at once: be aroused by what we see while honoring the humanity of the woman whose body attracts our eye. The most pernicious of all lies about men is that because of our make-up, lust and empathy can’t coexist within us. If you want kind and compassionate men who will respect women’s boundaries, the myth suggests, those women will have to conceal the parts of themselves that will turn men bestial and irresponsible.

We present women with a brutal binary: hide your sexuality and be respected; show your sexuality and be slut-shamed, harassed, or worse. But if ever there were a false dichotomy, rooted in ignorance about male identity, male biology, and male potential, this is it. While none of us want to live in a culture where women are compelled to display those parts of themselves they’d like to keep private, none of us should settle for living in a society where women are compelled to conceal those parts of themselves they’d occasionally like to display.

Men rape and harass not because of biological imperative but because of cultural permission. To paraphrase George W. Bush, we treat men with the “soft bigotry of low expectations.” Of course, the real price for those low expectations is paid by women, who become responsible for managing and redirecting what we refuse to expect men to manage for themselves.

As a feminist, as a man, and as a father to a daughter, I stand with the “sluts of Toronto” – and with women everywhere who demand the right to be treated with decency regardless of their attire.

Originally posted on HugoSchwyzer.net; Cross-posted with permission.

Related content:

WTF?: Video Games Now Simulate Rape

“HEY Shorty” : A Tall Lesson on Sexual Harassment

 

 

 

Post to Twitter

A Place for Me: Art, Porn, Feminism, and Race

Image by Favianna Rodriguez

By Favianna Rodriguez

Originally posted on Favianna.com; cross-posted with permission.

I’m always excited when my art world merges with my personal world. As a visual artist, that personal world is one where I’m constantly imagining the sort of artwork I want to create. What kinds of images do I want to draw? What questions do I want to pose? Do I care what people will think of me?

Today I spent an evening with my Latina sistah/gurlfriend and we were discussing the need for more popular and positive education formats to talk about sex. I was talking about the various podcasts I find online that talk about non-monogamy and non-conventional relationships (such as PolyWeekly.com), but complained that so many of these podcasts did not speak to me as a woman of color. What if, I thought, I could create a podcast that openly talked about non-monogamous relationships and how they are accepted (or rejected) in communities of color? How do our sexual hang-ups, or sexual liberations, intersect with our experiences around race? After all, talking about women of color’s health means also talking out our history with sexual abuse and sexual violence, particularly as it has played out in colonial, slavery, and imperialist contexts.

Image by Favianna Rodriguezrelationships (such as PolyWeekly.com), but complained that so many of these podcasts did not speak to me as a woman of color. What if, I thought, I could create a podcast that openly talked about non-monogamous relationships and how they are accepted (or rejected) in communities of color? How do our sexual hang-ups, or sexual liberations, intersect with our experiences around race? After all, talking about women of color's health means also talking out our history with sexual abuse and sexual violence, particularly as it has played out in colonial, slavery, and imperialist contexts.

We ended our night with a stroll into Oakland’s newest sex-positive store and gallery, FEELMORE, owned by a woman of color with years of experience in the pleasure industry. I was inspired by three things when I walked into the store: 1) the artistic and erotic images of people of color decorating the walls, 2) the conversation I had with the owner, who briefly talked about her vision for the store as a place where folks could come for sex education, and 3) a queer girl film I picked up, which I just learned was nominated for an award for Feminist Porn. The film “Tight Places” breaks new ground in the queer porn scene by being the first to feature an all people of color cast. I can’t wait to see it and review it!

I felt inspired overall, because for many years I have wanted to create art about sexual liberation, non-monogamy, sex-positivity, porn, erotica, kink, and stuff that I rarely talk about in public. Yes, I’m an anti-capitalist, and an environmentalist, and a lover of the planet, a lover of people and their rights, and a fighter of justice. But sadly, the definition around being “radical” or “progressive” so often leaves out a revolution around sex and the constructs around it. In fact, when I have raised the issue of heterosexism and monogamism (meaning the dominance and enforcement of “monogamy”), I get ostracized or isolated. When will the day come when I can hold my “Stop Deportations” banner alongside my “Fight the Climate Crisis” banner, alongside my “Release your Inner Slut” banner?

Really, when will we as a progressive sector begin to embrace a full liberation of not just out outer selves, but our inner-selves? That includes challenging the things we have learned about sex, about relationships, and about pleasure.

As an artist it is one of the topics that most interests me but I have not been able to fully explore at times because of my own fears of being rejected by my community. But spaces like FEELMORE, remind me the importance of women of color being voices for a new political analysis on sex, gender, queerness, porn, sex work, monogamy, etc. We have to be OUT and unapologetic. That is how we can address the fear. So keep your eyes open for my upcoming art about Slutdom.

On that note, I have some work in an exhibit in Minnesota, “Everybody! Visual Resistance in Feminist Health Movements, 1969-2009. “  Everybody! presents work by artists and activists engaged with the women’s health movement, inaugurated by feminists in the later 1960s and 70s and continuing up to the present day. Featuring advocacy posters and self-education publications, polemical paintings, descriptive drawings, poetic artists’ books and a provocative performance sculpture, this exhibition provides visual evidence of the struggle to define health care as a human right, and the quest to view every body as beautiful.

On display through May 8, 2011, admission to Everybody! and the Carleton College Art Gallery is free and open to the public.

Following the evolution of the movement, Everybody! presents recent creative responses to issues extending beyond women’s bodies to the health needs of women, men, and transgendered people. These include “Constructa/vulva,” a large soft sculpture conceived in homage to the 1970s feminist women’s health movement, a wall drawing imagining girls endowed with non-human reproductive organs, wallpaper featuring historical birth control devices, and videos and websites exploring gender transformation and other themes.

The image above is one of the author’s prints and can be purchased by visiting Favianna’s online store.

Related content:

Period Panties & Body Shame: An OCD Journey Through My Underwear Drawer

Sex, My Body and Giving it Up

The Naked Clam and Other Preposterous Pubic Hair Problems

Post to Twitter

Older Leading Ladies and the Evolution of Hollywood

Photograph by: Handout, Disney via the Montreal Gazette
Meryl Streep

Copyright Matt Sayles - Associated Press

Between 2003 and 2009, the number of roles for older women in film and on television more than doubled. Rebecca Keegan of the Los Angeles Times wrote:

According to the Screen Actors Guild, in 2003 women older than 40 accounted for 11 percent of the female film and TV roles (excluding reality shows); by 2009 that number was up to 28 percent. There’s still a gender gap when it comes to age in Hollywood — men in the over-40 category nabbed 42 percent of the roles last year, but older actresses are gaining ground.

Although 28 percent is far from a majority, we have to celebrate the fact that in the 21st century actresses over 40 years of age are being taken much more seriously. Keegan speculates that there is

a growing awareness in the movie industry of the untapped potential of older audiences, especially female ones. The women who helped drive box-office hits like The Blind Side, The Devil Wears Prada and Sex and the City would rather go out and watch Meryl Streep flirt with Alec Baldwin than stay home and play on their X-Boxes like the young adults that studios so often court.

Meryl Streep, Diane Lane, Demi Moore, Helen Mirren, Halle Berry, Julianne Moore, Naomi Watts, Julia Roberts, and Sandra Bullock are just a few of the women who are chipping away at the glass ceiling in Hollywood. As consumers, we can affect change via our movie choices. Let’s make 2011 the year these leading ladies smash that tired old ceiling altogether.

Read the full story by Rebecca Keegan of the Los Angeles Times here.

Related Content:

View Your Body As If You Were 80

The Old and Tired

Seeing Beauty in All: Over-40 Nudes

Face It! – What Women Really Feel as Their Looks Change, The Book

Huff Post Highlights Beautiful Older Women

Cougars: Unfortunately Coming to a Town Near You

Post to Twitter

Are your roots bad for business?

Disney's Jasmine
Disney's Jasmine

Disney's Jasmine

By Debra J. Dickerson, SLATE

Two very different stories about women—i.e., strength, beauty, femininity, fantasy, cowardice, bravery, and acquiescence—struck me this week.  I still don’t know whether they fill me with hope or sadness.

First, there was the 22-year-old U. of Illinois student Disney recruited online and telephonically through a campus event. She had to rock to snag an internship with a company like that.

It was a dream come true for Disney’s newest intern; she’d grown up revering the Disney princesses. Belle (Beauty and the Beast) and Ariel (The Little Mermaid) in particular. Also my 7-year old’s fetish-princesses. So the psych major worked her booty off, thrashed the competition, and moved that triumphant booty, that life, from Chicago to California for the fall 2010 internship for which her relatives likely held family celebrations, perhaps fundraisers, all summer.

On arrival, triumph became humiliation. One look at her and she was summarily “assigned [] to a more secluded stockroom.”

Silly Noor Abdallah. She’d arrived in her “scary” hijab.

Read More: Slate

Post to Twitter