The Observer had a piece yesterday on the media's obsession with the "Bad Girls of Hollywood," and questions why everyone seems to get off on watching these irritating rich, white women get in trouble.
While an obvious answer to this is that it's entertaining to see these overly privileged bad gals like Britney Spears, Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan who think they can get away with anything not only be treated as criminals just as any one of us would, but also have overwhelming flaws and personal problems. (In other words, rich life ain't all that grand.)
But is there more to it? And what is so appealing about famous women's demise rather than the lads? 'We have had years of young male stars running amok. It is now so much more fun for the public to see beautiful young women being hauled off to jail,' said Robert Thompson, professor of popular culture at Syracuse University, New York state.
Is this saying something bigger about our culture? Why is it so much fun to watch "beautiful women" be imprisoned--or drug-addicted or clearly sick with eating disorders? And the comparison of these women's behavior with "Girls Gone Wild" is irksome as well; it's almost being posed as some kind of fetish. And who are we blaming?
To put it simply: is this a feminist issue?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The obsession with Hollywood's "bad" girls.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/5713
Women are the primary purchasers of these tabloids, and make up about 90% of the "celebrity blog" readership. Is it really a feminist issue if it's mostly women who are entertained by the "Hollywood Girls Gone Wild" stories?
Why would that disqualify it from being a feminist issue?
The media has BEEN obsessed with the antics of these girls, good, bad or otherwise. So the coverage of their alleged downfalls or mishaps fits in neatly with the entire celebutant scheme.
However, to answer your question, I think this IS a feminist issue with an interesting twist. The article questions whether or not these ladies' mothers are to blame for their bad, bad behavior. And sadly enough, mothers are still credited more with the moral upbringing of the children than fathers. However, since all three of these ladies are over the age of 18, the REAL question is why can't they control themselves by now?
Feminism also encompasses personal responsibility and it intrigues me that the media is hesitant to place the blame where it belongs...on the individuals. Plenty of people in Hollywierd party to no end and true enough, everyone makes mistakes. But what gives with the string of DUIs, coke in the pockets and trips to the gas station with no panties? La Perla not doing it for ya anymore?
The media STILL rags on Nick Nolte for his ever drunken antics and there was a time when Johnny Depp wasn't such a role model...
Time for the titillating trio to hire post-party drivers and body doubles if they can't change their behavior. Cause the media's not going anywhere.
alex,
it's not just the tabloids that are reporting these stories- they are on cnn and other "reputable" networks constantly. remember anna nicole's death and the media circus surrounding paris hilton's arrest? i would be extremely hesitant to say it's mostly women who are "entertained" by this.
SarahMC: That's pretty much subjective since no two people have the exact same definition of a "feminist issue"... personally, this doesn't seem like a feminist issue, but rather a depressing reflection of our society's media as a whole...
Azliza: Same as above, it's a reflection of the media as a whole. The reason I mentioned the tabloids and the celebrity blogs is because those are the people who actively SEEK that type of news exclusively. Many people I know are completely turned off by having those types of stories on what are supposed to be real news stations/papers, but that is the current state of mainstream media.
Is it a feminist issue? I don't think so. I think it's a media issue, but at a deeper level, it's a reflection of just how far down this vapid road our culture has taken us.
Personally, I feel sickened to be constantly bombarded by the images and stories concerning the ups and downs of these celebrities. The feminist issue, for me, is the message that is being conveyed by all this coverage. A few nights ago I was flipping through the tv and made the terrible choice of watching some of the Enews. I shit you not, they were touting the alcohol ankle bracelets as the 'hot new accesory'. Really.
Maybe its only me, but what kind of message is that?! Sure, the station was probably only attempting to be ironic, but I am uncertain. Why do we never hear about the actresses that acomplish great things? All we read about are coke noses, baby adoption, baby bumps, or which boyfriend this one stole from that one.
great reading for all.
alex, then maybe the question should be why is this coverage so mainstream? I argue that it's a feminist issue because people are getting off on seeing famous women in bad situations more than men. why is that? i don't know. maybe people enjoy seeing women fail more?
These women don't represent me in any way. I couldn't care less about the way they are treated in the media. Their own actions are what land them in such turmoil. If you all you've ever really done is drive drunk, get into petty feuds, make crappy records, and release several sex tapes what is there to admire and respect? I think it's a good sign that society shows such disdain for these celebs. Just because they are talked about doesn't mean they are well-liked. Every woman I know is disgusted by them, and most guys think they are skanks. They are the perfect examples of how not to behave. They just get so much attention because people generally don't look the other way when there is a trainwreck.
I think it's a media issue
And the media, which bombards us all and affects our views, is a feminist issue. So...
I actually read these blogs. I'm a guy, and I guess that puts me somewhat out of the odds. I can safely say that it isn't because of any fetish or attraction to these troubled women- it's the fact that at heart, I hate these people, and a sad part of my soul deeply enjoys watching them suffer.
Good luck on getting most people to admit it, but that's why I read them. That's why my girlfriend reads them. That's why everybody I've talked to about them reads them- we enjoy watching people in misery, especially when those people are rich and famous. And I'm an equal opportunity hater- earlier this morning I was laughing at Steve Martin, and my favorite celebrity trainwreck is the pathetic drug addict (that I feel no pity for), Pete Doherty.
Does this make a terrible human being? Possibly. Does it make me a sexist? Not in the slightest. You said, azliza, that you didn't know why, but the guess that you ventured with was that "people enjoyed watching women fail more." Your guess was incorrect, and only makes me wonder if you approached the issue wanting it to be a feminist issue.
And SarahMC, the situation with the media in the US goes so far beyond feminism it's just point-blank wrong to say that the media is currently a feminist issue. It's an incredible sociopolitical issue that goes far beyond the realm of sexism and gender. FOX news is hurting a lot of other things than just women, although women are certainly in their line of fire. I think this is a media issue, and while some media issues are indeed feminist issues, I don't think this is one of them.
I think it's a good sign that society shows such disdain for these celebs.
Society obsesses over these celebs. Society drools over the E! channel and tsk, tsk's. Little girls want to grow up to be just like Paris Hilton. These women are simultaneously worshipped and scolded. How society (men, women & children) thinks about "trainwrecks" like them is most DEFINITELY a feminist issue.
dbshawn - might the reason the mothers get brought into the debate over these women in particular be because their mothers have done so much to be part of their daughters' public lives? I don't recall much ever being said about Nicole Richie's mother, but Lindsey's mother was her manager at one point, and Britney's mother was long touted as her "best friend," if not her manager as well.
Similarly, you can't read an article about Jessica Simpson without a reference being made to her manager-father's creepy comment about the size of her breasts.
Alex, dude, just because the media is a complex issue that goes beyond sex and gender doesn't mean it doesn't INCLUDE sex and gender. What do you even think we mean when we refer to the "bad-girl-obsession" as a feminist issue? It doesn't mean, "If you buy US magazine you're sexist." That's how you seem to be interpreting it.
You're getting defensive about reading celebrity gossip blogs, which isn't necessary. Because "it's a feminist issue" doesn't mean what you apparently think it does.
what's the evidence for my "guess" being incorrect, other than your own personal experience of reading gossip blogs (again, not MSM).
SarahMC, I think you need to read what I said more carefully. I'm sorry for being snarky, but if you read what I just said about the media/feminism, you'll see that you just scolded me for agreeing with you.
As for the interpretations, if you could actually clarify what it meant for it be a feminist issue, perhaps the issue would become much clearer to me.
And azliza, when you say something but my personal experience clearly contradicts it, I would say that- from my point of view- what you said is clearly incorrect. If you're not looking from my point of view, you may form whatever judgement you wish. But if you wish to form a more accurate assessment, listening to a first-hand source might be helpful.
That was my point- what you said (my thought that maybe people like to see women fail more than they do men was incorrect) was clearly from your own vantage point, and not backed up by anything other than your own point of view.
thanks for clarifying.
SarahMC, but the media reports on Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan because the public is fascinated with them. In a market economy, if there's a demand for widgets, someone will be willing to sell you some.
Besides, feministing is part of the media as well.
Oh, I think that this is absolutely a feminist issue. Just because the media is completely screwed up and there are aspects to be concerned about from other frameworks as well doesn't mean that it isn't also a feminist issue.
The ways that tabloids and media journalism in general approach famous women is absolutely a feminist issue. I think that it's absolutely related to what alex is saying, in a sense: "I can safely say that it isn't because of any fetish or attraction to these troubled women- it's the fact that at heart, I hate these people, and a sad part of my soul deeply enjoys watching them suffer."
I think that there are several things happening, but I think that one of the things that happens it that there's a general variation on the whole "see that uppity bitch put in her place"ism that takes place. I think that there's a lot of indulging hate that goes on in the tabloid media. Women in the tabloids can't do anything right- they may be media darlings briefly, but the tabloids are constantly looking for things to beat them down with. If you're not out partying it up so they can make you look like a fool, then you're too fat or too skinny or you're not dressed up enough or you're wearing an ulgy outfit or you're dating a loser or you're cheating, etc, etc, etc. The standards of behavior for men and women in the Hollywood scene or so ridiculously different. If a woman goes out and gets drunk and is stumbling a little bit, the press are all over it. Am I to believe that there aren't dozens of men in Hollywood who get shit-faced every weekend? And nobody complains when a guy does these things as though he has an obligation to be a role model. People get outraged, outraged when someone like Spears shows some sexuality, because she's supposed to be a role model for young women, but her male counterparts can do whatever they want, and nobody screams "but the children!"
I think azliza is absolutely right, though- there's a definitely feeling of wanting to see women fail. People take a malicious delight in seeing women like Hilton "get theres" in ways that men rarely have to deal with.
I think there is always a great deal of popular interest in rich and/or people behaving badly. But the emphasis on "girls" (not women, even when they're 40 and have 2 kids) behaving badly allows both an opportunity to ogle the babes, and sneering condescension. It is a feminist issue because major news channels are covering the minor misadventures of these women as if they were significant, and almost always this stuff is covered as yet another fault of feminism. Male celebrities who screw up are asshats who screw up. Female celebrities who screw up are bad role models and an indication of how an entire generation of females are going to hell.
Every woman I know is disgusted by them, and most guys think they are skunks
In other words, women respond to the news coverage by distancing themselves as far as possible within the gender, and men care only if they are adequate sperm receptacles.
And it’s definitely a feminist issue because male celebs are treated quite differently by the media and the public. The message is that as a woman you should look a certain way and present yourself a certain way (“sexy�, “wild�, etc. ), and that’s the only way people are going to pay any attention to you. But if you behave that way and do what we’re encouraging you to do, we are going to ridicule you. No matter what you do you just can’t win, because you are a woman.
Mine was based on personal experience, whereas yours was based on apparently nothing beyond your suspicions that people enjoyed watching female celebrities in turmoil for the sole reason that they were female... rather than, yknow, the fact that they're filthy rich, lazy, racist, stupid beyond words, and basically the embodiment of all that is wrong in our society today. Or, yknow, it could be because they're women, because, well, you said so.
Color me unconvinced.
“rather than, yknow, the fact that they're filthy rich, lazy, racist, stupid beyond words, and basically the embodiment of all that is wrong in our society today.�
Eh? I suppose there aren’t any men with the same qualification. Or is it just that you can’t stand women who are filthy rich? Why don’t people talk about that scumbag Joe Francis all the time?
the difference is that mine was a guess, and yours was an assertion that i was wrong. if you want to call reading celeb blogs "personal experience," then i have tons of personal experience too.
roymac- i think you hit it on the head. there's something that's much more scandalous to people about women partying and being irresponsible. the media definitely latches onto party-goers of both sexes, but the outcome is much different: colin farrell getting arrested is a "boys-will-be-boys" shrug, where paris hilton getting arrested is a "that dumb slut!" take.
SarahMC, but the media reports on Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan because the public is fascinated with them. In a market economy, if there's a demand for widgets, someone will be willing to sell you some.
Oh, of course! And because there's a market for it, it can't be a feminist issue! How silly of me!
Gah.
Look, just because the market can sustain or profit by something doesn't mean that it's not of social concern, nor does it mean that it's not a feminist issue. There's a market for just about anything, but sometimes we recognize that the social ills from a particular commodity outweigh whatever perceived economic benefit there might be.
I promise you, there's a market for child labor. If they could, lots of businesses would employ children in a heartbeat. That doesn't mean that it shouldn't concern us or that we should turn a blind eye to it if a business starts pushing for relaxing child labor laws.
I think the reason that I see it as a potentially feminist issue is that the actions of these girls may be perceived or justified by some as being "feminist," but that those beliefs stem from misunderstanding of what feminism really means.
The article theorizes that one of the reasons for this obsession with "bad girls" is a "reflection of the generally increasing power and visibility of women in all fields of entertainment." I don't really agree with this theory - it sounds to me like its blaming feminism, in a sense, for the fact that these women are in the spotlight, instead of pointing out that it is the isolated actions of a few women in particular and not reflective of the all women involved in the industry.
It bothers me that people might interpret the prevalence of these women in the media as connected to feminism - because I don't believe that these women really represent what it means to be feminist.
sojourner, I already stated above that I enjoy reading about both male and female celebrities. My favorite celebrity trainwreck, as I said above, is Pete Doherty.
I'm going to chime in and say that I think the current political climate also plays a part in why we're seeing so much of this (sorry if I'm repeating anyone). With this administration no one wants to show what's really happening so to have tabloids become "news" is a great way to distract people and it seems like the public doesn't even mind, they'd rather keep track of the goings on of these girls than actually deal with reality.
UltraMagnus, I'd agree. I think that our current political climate has the strongest influence on what goes into the news, and tabloids work perfectly in conjunction with the current decline of actual news.
Which little girls know who Paris Hilton is? Where are they getting the idea that she is something to aspire to?
In a word: schadenfreude.
Apparently a lot of people consider it entertaining to when a beautiful woman gets imprisioned and punished. There should be a movie...
Kaethe- one of those little girls is my 6-year-old niece, who thinks that Paris looks like one of her Bratz dolls and must be something to aspire to because she is always on the television, therefore she must be important.
azliza, thanks. I knew there was a reason I don't watch the news: I'm protecting the children.
Derek, the fact that there's a huge market for celebrity gossip like this is a feminist issue.
Trash is trash regardless of gender. Male "celebs" are looked at poorly if they are seen as being worthless party boys. Look at Brody Jenner and Spencer Pratt. They're just as despised as Paris Hilton(and rightly so), and no one likes Joe Francis either. The guy is scum. I also don't think you can compare Colin Farrell to Paris Hilton. His female counterpart is more like Angelina Jolie or Scarlett Johansson.
Who and who, Nicole?
I've never even heard of Brody Jenner or Spencer Pratt. Joe Francis is despised by feminists, but there's nowhere near the negative press about him that there is around Hilton or Lohan. And, quite frankly, he does a lot more harm than either of them do. He's scum, but the only time there's really bad press around him is when he finally goes to freakin' prison, or when a feminist is complaining. Otherwise, he's treated with a certain sort of light-hearted ribbing. He's treated like someone that guys wish they could be like- he's the frat-guy who made it.
I think that the feminist issues are around what these young women get castigated for and how they're castigated. They're attacked for "inappropriate" sexual behavior in a way that their male counterparts simply aren't. Their appearances are scrutized in a way their male counterparts' aren't. They're attacked for being bad mothers in a way that their male counterparts are not attacked for being bad fathers. And when they fuck up, it seems to tar their character in a way that it doesn't for men. Tom Cruise is bouncing back well enough. Mel Gibson drove drunk and revealed the depths of his raging anti-Semitism--and hey, he's still box office.
There's also the issue of how the medica attention itself is playing into these girls' meltdowns. I'm thinking particularly of Britney Spears, whom I just feel bad for these days. When she started losing the thread, all I could think was "Hey, you mean that marketing your teenage daughter's virginity as an object of sexual fantasy for pervy older men (Bob Dole) might not be the most psychologically healthy thing you could do for her? Who knew?"
It also seems to me that celebrity-meltdown focus goes in phases. For my money, the single most entertaining celebrity meltdown was the extended Tom Cruise-Katie Holmes debacle. But more recently we've been getting a spate of young, dumb rich women.
Nice attempt, Nicole. But B.J. and S.P. are nobodies to most people - other than those who watch The Hills. CNN doesn't offer round-the-clock-coverage of their goings-on, that's for sure.
I've never even heard of Brody Jenner or Spencer Pratt.
Me neither.
It seems to me that this thread itself is lacking a good dose of feminism. There certainly is some woman hating going on- why not show a bit of compassion toward these women instead of reducing them to 'whores' or 'skanks' or whatever?
Is that so, Jillas? Well, thanks for coming to feministing to teach us how to be good feminists? Who hear is using the word whore? Can you please specify? Nicole is the only one who used the word skank and if you actually read the thread you’ll see that most everyone here is disagreeing with her.
Jillas, the folks using words like "whore" and "skanks" are the people who DENY that this is a feminist issue. They usually deny that feminism is important, period.
I think that Nicole was just pointing out that on the gossip blogs that a lot of the women read (which was mentioned in the original post) contain just as much damning information about the men as the women, the difference comes with the MSM, where it then becomes all about the women. CNN really doesn't give a fuck about Pete Doherty, not like something like Dlisted or What Would Tyler Durden Do does and that's the issue. When it's about the women the mainstream media is all over it.
It's a feminist issue because these celebrities are touted as "successful" women (note - white, from at least the middle class, protestant, hetero etc) and to watch them fall is the most perfect outlet for the patriarchy to mock "successful woman" as an oxymoron.
Note that we're not talking about the success, we're talking about the downfall.
also, most of these girls are seen as just hot bodies rather than talented whatever, and when they do something decidedly unsexy, they get jumped on for not maintaining the fantasies of (presumably) men. famous men aren't held to the same standard of being sexy, so nobody's fantasy is ruined when they do something stupid.
It's also a feminist issue because throughout the entire thread there's disdain for these women instead of sympathy. Where is the empathy - these women are tragic, I would not switch lives with Brittany!
"at heart, I hate these people, and a sad part of my soul deeply enjoys watching them suffer"
That IS sad, it is not ok to delight in another human being's misery. Especially when the cause of their misery (the patriarchy) is something most of us on a feminist site can relate to.
They are not skanks and whores, they are women who have brought up in this society that reduces them to sex tapes and crotch shots.
"also, most of these girls are seen as just hot bodies rather than talented whatever, and when they do something decidedly unsexy, they get jumped on for not maintaining the fantasies of (presumably) men. famous men aren't held to the same standard of being sexy, so nobody's fantasy is ruined when they do something stupid."
Just jumping in for a second here...I honestly could care less about whatever OK! Magazine or Us Weekly has on their covers, but I don't know if these actions from Lohan, etc. really go into this territory. I don't think they are always getting jumped on for not maintaining the fantasies of (presumably) men. In Lohan's case, isn't she really getting jumped on for drugs? I don't think that has a lot to do with fulfilling fantasies, and, well, if we're going to go down that route, I'd argue that a lot of guys wouldn't mind gettin' down with a girl who's in posession of a few controlled substances. Just my opinion.
Also, I know men aren't held to the same standards of being sexy, but honestly, if I saw Christian Bale or Ewan McGregor flashing their balls everywhere and being charged with DUIs, then the fanatasy would *definitely* be diminished, if not killed completely.
I think it's absolutely a feminist issue.
We've got studies that show how female criminals are punished more harshly than male criminals for the same offense. The theoretical explanation for this is that women are viewed as naturally less capable of being violent.
Uppity women are punished for not being docile and subservient.
RoyMacIII is right:
There's the madonna/whore thing going on. Our society expects female celebs to be either angels or whores and they get off on seeing whores.
Roy wrote, and I agree:
It's also a feminist issue because of the unequal treatment of men and women in the press.
And as Kaethe said,
And this needs to be said again:
Joe Francis needs to be locked up for the rest of his life.
Elle, I think Lohan is getting attacked for drugs, yes, but maybe because being a coke addict in and out of rehab isn't sexually appealing (as opposed to genuine concern for her welfare). it's kind of like taking that "what kind of role models are you for kids?" argument and replacing it with "fantasy for adults."
uh, way to twist my words roymacIII (again!). I didn't say or imply in the least that this shouldn't be a feminist issue. I just don't see the point of blaming "the media," which as SarahMC put it "bombards us all and affects our views." Gosh, I thought it was that women were buying magazines like People, US Weekly and Star. But I guess those magazines just jump right into their cart at the checkout line, huh? "Don't blame me - I was bombarded!"
How thrilled I am to see this thread! I'm so interested in this phenomenon that I'm planning to teach a course in it next year.
Still, I'm a little surprised at denial of misogyny in the media (??). If you're not sure whether this is a feminist issue, try talking to your average guy about it. Notice the level of disgust in his voice when he rants about Paris Hilton, but note also that he's probably jerked off to her sex tapes. Anyone who has been on MySpace has seen the photos of Britney's crotch passed around like a greeting card. Of *course* everyone gets off on their demise. It's an extension of porn culture: the denigration of the desired object, lust + disgust. Men and women have different reasons for enjoying the show, but if Paris et al were a) ugly or b) male, this wouldn't be happening.
In other words, what RoyMac said, only a little more explicit ;)
Derek, the media and it's consumers are two parts in this phenomenon. I never said magazines jump into shopping carts, but it's hard to avoid "ZOMG BrItneee!" stories if you have a television or radio, work near a television or radio, or ever enter supermarkets or bookstores.
I think that the uppity woman getting her comeupance has been a major theme in pop culture- particularly rich and beautiful women. I think this is related to the idea that women are supposed to suffer as a part of being a woman, and these women just haven't suffered enough. Now watching them come down a peg is enjoyable because it's forced suffering, with a huge audience.
Seeing these women humiliated is entertainment for men who resent the idea of a woman being rich or powerful and who resent women having sexual power over them, and for women who have been taught under the patriarchy to both associate themselves and disassociate themselves with other women following the opinions of men.
Of course I hate what these young female celebrities stand for- materialism, racism, subservience to the male gaze, but at the same time I am very aware that they were not created in a vacuum.
uh, way to twist my words roymacIII (again!). I didn't say or imply in the least that this shouldn't be a feminist issue.
That's not how I saw it. Sarah made several comments about how the portayal of women in the media is a feminist issue, and your response was "but the media reports on Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan because the public is fascinated with them" and went on to point out that as long as there's a market, there'll be someone to sell it. I didn't twist anything- I quoted you and responded. If you didn't mean to imply that it wasn't a feminist issue, that's fine.
I just don't see the point of blaming "the media," which as SarahMC put it "bombards us all and affects our views." Gosh, I thought it was that women were buying magazines like People, US Weekly and Star. But I guess those magazines just jump right into their cart at the checkout line, huh? "Don't blame me - I was bombarded!"
You don't think that the media bombards us and has a tremendous impact on cultural norms? Yeah, people (not just women, but nice bit of essentialism there) buy magazines and watch television and go see movies- but if you don't think that all the images we take in have consequences and that those images have an impact on our habits and on the culture, you're out of you mind. Think of the billions and billions of dollars that go into advertising- that money is being spent to produce images to influence our habits in ways that we may not be completely aware of. That's the entire point of advertising. To influence the buying habits of the consumer. Yeah, we're buying magazines and we're tuning in the television, but all of those things we take in do end up having effects.
In order to see the vast effect that media can have on, say, youth culture, one need look no further than MTV.
It's a two-way street, sure, but let's not pretend that magazines and television are just these innocent things that we pick up that have no impact on our lives what-so-ever.
Well, I don't know what anybody sees in those bad girl/rehab stories because personally I'd rather spend an hour scrubbing the grout in my shower than reading a tabloid.
But, on the theory that it has to do with a backlash against women's increasing power (i.e. putting uppity bitches in their place), this is a good place to say that the whole spoiled-princess trend of recent years is NOT the same thing as feminism. Feminism is a big tent, but I think it's safe to say that there's no room in there for the diggers or the females who say "I deserve (x/y/z) because I'm a woman and that's my prerogative." Those skanks give women a bad name. There's nothing feminist about that.
Well, okay SarahMC, but the reason for that is that people are interested. You might not care about the stock market or baseball scores either, but it's also hard to avoid them, and the reason for it is that the public is interested. I just think it's silly to blame "the media" as if it were some big monolithic beast and there was no difference between the NYT and Star magazine. (And as if blogs like Feministing weren't part of the media by now).
I wish I could offer some intelligent perspective to this issue, though. It is worth noting Britney & Lohan were all very famous (far more famous than any guy their age) before their recent troubles. The Observer piece is worth reading.
i think self-identified feminists calling other women skanks give feminism a bad name.
For the last time, Derek, I never claimed the public wasn't interested in celebrity gossip!
All I claimed was that yes, it's a feminist issue. Then you started lecturing about economics.
Feminism is a big tent, but I think it's safe to say that there's no room in there for the diggers or the females who say "I deserve (x/y/z) because I'm a woman and that's my prerogative." Those skanks give women a bad name.
Did you say "in there" rather than "in here" because women-blaming in such patriarchy-affirming ways is not especially feminist?
OK, maybe "skanks" was the wrong choice of word. I still stand by the basic idea: diggers/princess types =/= feminists.
as pop-cultured as i am, i have no idea what a 'digger' is.
Especially when the cause of their misery (the patriarchy) is something most of us on a feminist site can relate to.
They are not skanks and whores, they are women who have brought up in this society that reduces them to sex tapes and crotch shots.
Kate, the cause of their misery is their own stupidity. These people are rich as fuck, and what do they do with their time and money? They get drunk, snort coke, party every night, spew racist epithets, and sleep with everything that moves. This is unacceptable behavior from any person, male or female. Furthermore, the celebrities themselves choose to "leak" sex tapes and flash their private parts--they do it to drum up publicity for their next garbage movie or CD release. They know that millions of women (and a much smaller number of men) will buy the gossip rags, go "tsk tsk", and indulge in their juvenile inclination to talk shit about other women. They are taking advantage of the system to enrich themselves further. You don't like the sex tapes? Maybe you should blame Paris Hilton, who started the trend. Every time some actress sells her dignity in exchange for increased fame, it becomes more socially acceptable for the next woman to release her own home video.
If you're not sure whether this is a feminist issue, try talking to your average guy about it. Notice the level of disgust in his voice when he rants about Paris Hilton, but note also that he's probably jerked off to her sex tapes.
Who is buying the magazines? Teen People - 80% female. Hello magazine - 82% female. OK magazine - 93% female.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hello!
http://www.unicef.org/magic/bank/case018.html
http://www.ok-magazine.com/media/media_kit.pdf
You want somebody to blame? Talk to your fellow women who are buying this trash and creating the market for it. Oh, and everybody is disgusted by Paris Hilton (except little Bratz girls who aren't taught better)! We don't hate her because she's female, we hate her because shows such contempt for us "peasants", "fat bitches", and "niggers". She has contributed nothing of value to society, and the young generation of females now thinks it's cool to be a dumb racist arrogant waste of oxygen, as long as you're rich.
I don't think Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, or Lindsay Lohan identify as feminists. Nor is that the point. Feminism shouldn't be a club to bash other women. "Diggers" is just ludicrous, since all three of these women are currently single, and the only one who's been married was the main breadwinner for her family.
ohhh... gold diggers. i get it now.
Yeah, I'm almost 100% certain none of these women considers herself a feminist, but conservatives and anti-feminists love to hold them up as examples of feminism and how ZOMG it's turning ur dawter into a slut!!
Ironic, eh?
Especially when the cause of their misery (the patriarchy) is something most of us on a feminist site can relate to.
They are not skanks and whores, they are women who have brought up in this society that reduces them to sex tapes and crotch shots.
Kate, the cause of their misery is their own stupidity. These people are rich as fuck, and what do they do with their time and money? They get drunk, snort coke, party every night, spew racist epithets, and sleep with everything that moves. This is unacceptable behavior from any person, male or female. Furthermore, the celebrities themselves choose to "leak" sex tapes and flash their private parts--they do it to drum up publicity for their next garbage movie or CD release. They know that millions of women (and a much smaller number of men) will buy the gossip rags, go "tsk tsk", and indulge in their juvenile inclination to talk shit about other women. They are taking advantage of the system to enrich themselves further. You don't like the sex tapes? Maybe you should blame Paris Hilton, who started the trend. Every time some actress sells her dignity in exchange for increased fame, it becomes more socially acceptable for the next woman to release her own home video.
If you're not sure whether this is a feminist issue, try talking to your average guy about it. Notice the level of disgust in his voice when he rants about Paris Hilton, but note also that he's probably jerked off to her sex tapes.
Who is buying the magazines? Teen People - 80% female. Hello magazine - 82% female. OK magazine - 93% female.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hello!
http://www.unicef.org/magic/bank/case018.html
http://www.ok-magazine.com/media/media_kit.pdf
You want somebody to blame? Talk to your fellow women who are buying this trash and creating the market for it. Oh, and everybody is disgusted by Paris Hilton (except little Bratz girls who aren't taught better)! We don't hate her because she's female, we hate her because shows such contempt for us "peasants", "fat bitches", and "n*****s". She has contributed nothing of value to society, and the young generation of females now thinks it's cool to be a dumb racist arrogant waste of oxygen, as long as you're rich.
In other news, this is refreshing! Even if she doesn't get much media attention these days. Sigh... I loved The Wonder Years.
roymacIII - Well, I'm sure that TV influences styles and such. But whether we were gleeful or not seeing Paris Hilton put in jail? I'm dubious.
*sigh* OK. I wouldn't call Britney, Paris, or Lindsay feminists, or diggers either. But I think their popularity in recent years is part of a trend (among some women, not all, etc.) to want to be Barbie princesses and use their looks to wrap the world around their fingers. See, for example, the whole Bridezilla trend. I'm not just making this up; other people have noticed it too, like a guy who wrote this sentence in a recent Newsweek article about the popularity of Jane Austen novels: "...the motor of all her books—courtship leading up to marriage—has a strong resonance in the socially conservative 2000s, when young women who might once have been feminists aspire to be Bridezillas, starting their marriages $20,000 in debt."
No, of course feminism shouldn't be a forum for bashing other women. But if feminism means I have to stand behind every single woman who's ever done anything in public, then count me out. I think that would be another Vagina Litmus Test (as in, the requirement that every woman in the US must vote for Hillary) that I would fail.
SarahMC said I better than I could: "I'm almost 100% certain none of these women considers herself a feminist, but conservatives and anti-feminists love to hold them up as examples of feminism and how ZOMG it's turning ur dawter into a slut!!" Anybody who's conflating feminism with Britney/Paris and using that to justify antifeminist backlash doesn't know what he's talking about. Not that Britney or Paris deserve bashing, just ignoring (please!!!).
Badnfluence, I appreciate what you have to say, but these two sentiments contradict one another:
everybody is disgusted by Paris Hilton
and
the young generation of females now thinks it's cool to be a dumb racist arrogant waste of oxygen, as long as you're rich.
I'd also add that it's not just schoolchildren who think it's cool. Plenty of GROWN women think they're princesses, refuse to lift a finger for themselves, consider dogs *accessories* and generally feel entitled to the world. It's not exclusive to little girls.
I think this is surely a feminist issue. There is something scary about celebrating the failure or demise of some women rather than celebrating the successes of other women. It seems to illustrate what interests our society about women: them being wild, "out of control," rather than seeing women in positions of power and doing impressive things in business, political, and social arenas.
There is something scary about celebrating the failure or demise of some women
In some sense I feel the women/girls like Paris and Britney who are getting bashed now have been a bit of a straw man. First the media made them out to be some kind of superhuman, omnipotent sex goddesses (well, no, they were just dumb, unpleasant, not particularly attractive twits), and now our resentment of them is supposed to have built up to such an extent that they need to be taken down a peg or two. I feel about them the way I feel about a lot of celebs: they lived by the hype, now they can die by the hype. It's a feminist issue only to the extent that female celebrities come in for more bashing than male celebrities, but all of them are more or less trash in my book.
sojourner, calm down, please. I did not mean to offend. Nor was my comment directed at anyone in particular. And no, no one seems to have used the word 'whore,' hence my use of the word 'whatever.' Anyway, I was trying to get at what kate was better able to articulate...
"It's also a feminist issue because throughout the entire thread there's disdain for these women instead of sympathy. Where is the empathy - these women are tragic, I would not switch lives with Brittany!...That IS sad, it is not ok to delight in another human being's misery. Especially when the cause of their misery (the patriarchy) is something most of us on a feminist site can relate to."
"K-Fed" is a perfect example of how men who behave with no class are also scorned by society. Lindsay, Paris, and Nicole Richie are no different. Who cares if they're women? They don't represent all of us! They are responsible for all of their detractors. No one forced Paris to make a sex tape with that sleaze or get in a car after she had too much to drink. The fact that people think she's trash is because of her actions(and lack of meaningful accomplishments), not because she's a woman. There are tons of female celebs who are not trashed by the media. Most everyone I know has nothing but negative opinions on these celebs. It would sadden me to think there are young girls that look up to Paris, but I hope they get the message that she(and her "friends") doesn't have anyone's respect. The guy I have a crush on is the last person I heard call her a skank, and it makes me respect him even more. I think there is a backlash against these mindless fame addicts among young people, and it's refreshing.
Nicole, what is a skank? I would respect someone much better if they were able to see Paris, Lindsay et al for what they are - products of a voyeuristic, sexist, consumerist society that values money and looks over everything else. Yes, they're responsible for their own actions, but just like Anna Nicole, it's very blinkered to deliberately ignore the feminist issues that surround the objectification, sexualisation and exploitation of these women, by society and by themselves.
I also don't see that much evidence to suggest that these women "sleep with anything that moves". As young, single twenty-somethings, it's quite acceptable to have a number of sexual partners. I certainly did, and I would have taken great offence at being called a slut. Why are women who don't settle down and have babies (like Witherspoon) called sluts? It seems like very sexist and outdated thinking to me.
Furthermore, it is simply ridiculous to suggest that men are held up to the same scrutiny for their sexual behaviour. Jude Law has cheated on his ex-wife, and appears to "sleep with anything that moves", yet the worst I've heard him called is a "love-rat". Whereas Paris has been called a whore, slut, "skank" (god I hate that word), not to mention ugly, diseased etc. Angelina is viciously attacked as being a man-stealing whore, even though Brad was the one who left his wife - and he's a grown intelligent person, quite capable of making his own decisions. There are numerous examples of where women are vilified as temptresses or sluts when men simply are not subjcted to the same treatment.
Women's appearance and sexuality is the first thing to be attacked, which is ironic, because it is their looks and sexiness that seems to be what society valued enough to make them famous.
i think there's a big diff between k-fed as kind of a national joke and the nonstop coverage of these 'celebutantes' and their respective downward spirals.
and i think it's important to clarify that feminism doesn't mean that all women are righteous and should be treated as such, nor does it mean a woman should be uncriticized due to the sheer fact of her sex.
and the coverage/treatment/ attention/vocabulary surrounding these women just doesn't compare to that of their alleged male counterparts. thus, i agree that this is a feminist issue.
and it's been said before but i will say it again and like this:
i am very uncomfortable with likening people to trash. maybe their behavior is 'trashy' or their choices are garbage, but it's just so doggone nasty to call a woman trash. for real.
If it's just the public's love for scandal and front-row-centre tickets for the spectacle of The Mighty Falling, it's rather surprising that the only ones subjected to sustained coverage are women. If it's just about satisfying the public's supposed love for scandal, one could have a lot more fun with the sexual and other escapades of some of our favourite self-proclaimed moral apostles. But how much sustained coverage do we get of the fact that Bill Bennett — of Book of Virtues [sic] fame — is a degenerate gambler (and an asshole)? How much time is spent on drug-warrior Rush Limbaugh's love of pills? And how about George W. Bush's niece getting caught with crack while on probation (and not getting jail time)? If it's all about the fun of watching the mighty falling, we'd be seeing similarly sustained and lurid coverage of all of it, especially since it has the added amusement of seeing someone holier-than-though turn out to be less-holy-than-most. Can you imagine the fun the media would be having with these things if they were just trying to satisfy the public's alleged taste for scandal-mongering?
And yet these things are covered superficially if at all, and then quickly forgotten so that we can hear about a hotel heiress' latest cry for help.
Ugh, Nicole, you are getting so old.
You respect your current crush because he called Hilton a skank? To men, a "skank/slut/whore" is a woman who's sleeping with men who aren't them. Even guys who call Hilton a slut would still fuck her - because to guys, sex is just as much a means of punishing a woman they hate as it is expressing love to a woman they like.
You respect your current crush because he called Hilton a skank? To men, a "skank/slut/whore" is a woman who's sleeping with men who aren't them. Even guys who call Hilton a slut would still fuck her - because to guys, sex is just as much a means of punishing a woman they hate as it is expressing love to a woman they like.
That is a ridiculous generalization. I certainly don't punish womean I don't like with sex. I'm not in the minority. I tend to bristle at the gender slurs, but if i were to deem someone unsavory enough to label her a "slut," it would mean that I'd avoid sleeping with her. You've made some useful points on this post, but this right here essentially negates what you've said thus far. Some men are nasty. Most of us aren't. Chill
Sarah MC, while I agree that men who call women "skanks" or "whores" are reinforcing the idea that women's sexuality is abhorrent and "unladylike", whilst at the same time reinforcing their own fuck-em-and-leave-em sexual fantasies about "bad girls", your statement about guys using sex to punish women is a bit too universal. Perhaps you meant that *some* guys use sex as a means of degrading and punishing women - which is no doubt true.
And yes Nicole, men who refer to any woman as a skank are in fact disrespecting ALL women, so you might want to rethink that crush of yours. Yes Paris is a racist, consumerist, dumb twit, but why is she always attacked as a slut? Is the fact that she is sexually active really the most offensive aspect of her?
Is it in fact offensive at all?
I amend my statement about men, Ledlight. You're right. SOME men use sex as a means of degrading women they hate.
It is possible to be sexy without being trashy. It is possible to have sex without being a slut. I've never said anything to the contrary. Paris is both trashy and promiscuous though IMO. There a tapes of her comitting sex acts with a bunch of sleazy guys(Joe Francis being one of them). She flaunts her body like it's a piece of meat. She has no other qualities than her body and sexuality. She's not intelligent. She has a one dimensional personality. It is true that many guys would sleep with her, but that is all they would want her for. She's easy, and when something is easy to obtain it loses its value. This is related to one gender. I wouldn't want a guy who's slept with anything that walks. I would want someone with higher standards than that. I'm not anti-sex, and I like to feel sexy too. There is just a classier way to express that. I think sex can be a beautiful thing, but people like Paris and Joe Francis devalue it.
She's easy, and when something is easy to obtain it loses its value.
You view sex as a commodity. I don't know what else to say.
"And yes Nicole, men who refer to any woman as a skank are in fact disrespecting ALL women, so you might want to rethink that crush of yours."
How so? I'm not every woman. If I call a certain man a pig am I disrespecting the entire male population?
I do. Am I the only one who has had the thought that the behaviours Paris Hilton is so famous for (extreme promiscuity, substance abuse, escalating self-destructive behaviour etc. etc.) also happen to figure prominently amongst the symptoms one sees amongst survivors of sexual abuse?
"You view sex as a commodity. I don't know what else to say."
I view CASUAL sex as a cheap commodity. I view sex within a loving relationship as sacred.
I am guilty of reading celebrity blogs although I do often find myself offended by certain comments as women as not being worth "fucking" and other such comments.
I do feel pity for many of these girls, especially Britney and Lindsey Lohan. Britney has been in the spotlight since she was sixteen (not counting the mickey mouse club). Britney was expected to symbolize a specific sexualty before she most likely fully understand her own. Same with Lindsey Lohan. She started as a Disney actress and I think learned the hard way that she might not have the right acting talent so she stayed relevant the only way she knew how. Remember how young these girls were when this money and freedom was thrust upon them.
I know that at 16 I was not in the right position to have unlimited money and freedom. I don't know what would have happened to me if I lived in a town where I could go to night clubs at 18 without even needing a fake id or fear of an underage drinking ticket. I would like to think I would be smart and careful but I don't know. I might have drank too much, been irresponsible and stayed in the teenage mindset that the rest of the world was stupid except for me.
Fine Nicole - I'm just saying that calling someone a "skank" is not really very feminist, nor would I respect anyone who used the term. Sorry.
I just think the focus on Paris's sex life is disproportionate, and I still think that having a few casual sexual relationships does not a slut make - anyway, who made you the judge of what constitutes slutty behaviour? Why does that awful term even have to be used?
As you say, she's offensive because she's putting a very superficial, consumerist and hollow role-model out there - and she's relying on her looks rather than intelligence to get anywhere - in fact, she's turned "acting dumb" into an art form. No arguments there - but as I said, I do find the fact that she's so often referred to as a "filthy whore" offensive to my feminist sensibilities. There are plenty of Hollywood men who are just as pointless and sexually active, yet you do not see them castigated as whores the next week by the media. Do you see my point?
And - "It is true that many guys would sleep with her, but that is all they would want her for." I'm sure you'd agree that that says quite a lot (all of it unpleasant) about those guys.
OK, Nicole, so you're a conservative.
Nicole:
"She's easy, and when something is easy to obtain it loses its value."
"I view CASUAL sex as a cheap commodity. I view sex within a loving relationship as sacred."
So you're saying that if someone's had casual sex, then they become less valuable as a person, or that sex with them is somehow worth less? I wouldn't care how many previous lovers my partner had had, as long as he had been careful and treated me (and his former lovers) with respect.
Your moralising about sex isn't going to go down well here (pun intended), and I take great offense at you telling me that I'm somehow cheap because I'm not ashamed of my sexuality and have found mutual, casual sex very fulfilling in the past. Just because a woman is single and doesn't want a "loving relationship" at a given time (yes, it does happen), doesn't mean that she can't enjoy sex. Here's news – sex isn't objectively sacred, it's a physical act that is given meaning by the people involved in the act. You may view it as sacred, but just because I might view it as a good fuck, I'd still prefer that you didn't call me a skank or value-less or whatever you're trying to say.
sex isn't objectively sacred, it's a physical act that is given meaning by the people involved in the act.
True that.
sex isn't objectively sacred, it's a physical act that is given meaning by the people involved in the act.
True that.
Nicole: "How so? I'm not every woman. If I call a certain man a pig am I disrespecting the entire male population?"
No, but women are too often insulted because they’re sexually active, and "slut" is a very gender-specific term (how many men who use the word "slut" would apply it to other men?)
People who use that word often have a certain mindset about female sexuality – that women specifically aren't allowed to have sexually active lives outside of a relationship ("slut" is always an insult), and that they have the moral right to judge a woman based on her private sexual life.
It's a value-laden term, and does speak volumes about a person's attitude towards female sexuality in general.
Calling a man a "pig" (which is a fairly gender-neutral term anyway) doesn't have a universally recognised meaning, and isn't used to perpetuate damaging stereotypes about a man's sexuality, or to try and judge and shame what he chooses to do with his own body.
Nicole- I can't believe I'm about to defend Paris Hilton, because I find her a worthless human being (not because of her sexuality, just because she's a racist, drunk-driving, doing nothing with her life kind of person and I do agree that she has shown us no reason to value her besides for her body and sexuality, but she's not the only one) but she hardly made those sex tapes by herself. I'm not sure why you think that she "give it up" too easily. As far as I know, she is having sex WITH men, so aren't they also giving it up too easily? I'm not entirely sure why you think if a woman and a man want to have sex with each other, the woman should be the one to stop him, and if she doesn't, she's easy. It's a mutual decision, no? Why should women be stigmatized as sluts just for wanting to have sex as much as men do?
After hundreds of discussion with my friends about sexuality (namely how we feel about casual sex), we came to a pretty simple conclusion- sleep with who you want to sleep with (if you WANT TO), but respect yourself. I'm not entirely sure that Paris sleeps with all these guys because she wants to, or just because it will bring her more press coverage. I think that just because like I said, the only aspects of her public persona are really her sexuality and her body.
Justin- I'm not sure that Sarah MC's generalization was that ridiculous. Maybe not all guys do, but a seemingly liberal guy that i worked with once told me he wished someone would cum on Paris' face because she's a worthless person...he went on to say that he wouldn't do that to a woman he respected, but he doesn't respect her, so she deserves it. I don't talk to him much anymore...
"I know that at 16 I was not in the right position to have unlimited money and freedom. I don't know what would have happened to me if I lived in a town where I could go to night clubs at 18 without even needing a fake id or fear of an underage drinking ticket. "
Really though, is anything stopping them from going to college if they really wanted to? They have enough money that they could go to college, grad school and do work that matters if they really wanted. There are other young actresses and singers who may enjoy partying, but still let their talent speak for itself.
i personally don't like hearing these girls called sluts, bitches, fire crotch, etc. because i think it will only make it more acceptable to use those terms against all women in the real world. everyone has been in the situation where they've pissed someone off, and the first insult they get if they are a women is something along the lines of bitch and slut. obviously women are just as guilty at doing this as men are. it almost as if they're saying that feminist values apply to all women except for ones that feminist don't like. i definitely think this is a feminist issue.
Darcy- Are you referring to the Brandon Davis incident? Didn't the media slam him for talking about Linday Lohan like that? Also, I always thought fire-crotch was kind of a gender neutral (albeit ridiculous) term for people with red hair.
I think Joe Francis and Rick Salomon are just as sleazy as Paris Hilton. How much respect can she have for herself and her body if she's doing those scum bags?
I never said that any woman who has sex is a "slut" who is "giving it up". I think sex can be a wonderful thing. People like Paris turn it from an intimate act of love to mere humping between animals. It's all in the context. Both men and women are guilty of this, and I don't think a promiscuous man is any better than a promiscuous woman. Herpes are gross no matter who's they are.
...who think they can get away with anything not only be treated as criminals just as any one of us would, but also have overwhelming flaws and personal problems.
But they're not treated like criminals like all the rest of us. They are white and incredibly wealthy. They can afford good lawyers and be tried by a jury of their racial peers. Their behavior isn't used to justify stereotypes of the irresponsibility of their entire race. Most women, especially women of color and working class women, would not get off so easily as these celebrities do over and over again.
RockStar, fire crotch is just one of many examples. i just used it because so many people are aware of the incident at this point. what really bothers me is that paris hilton (just an example) is attacked more for her sex life than she is over the fact they she got DUI among other things. no one would have been laughing if she killed someone. though one of my biggest pet peeves is if the media is actually going to focus on these stories why don't they actually educate people on the issues that go along with the girls behavior like drug abuse, and eating disorders?
i think it's fine to hump without love, if all parties are enthusiastically consenting.
and also herpes can be exchanged in sacred sex too.
"and also herpes can be exchanged in sacred sex too."
I believe sex is only apropriate within a committed monogamous relationship, and I would never enter one with anyone who hadn't been tested for STDs. This goes beyond morality. It's just plain stupid to have sex with anyone without being sure they are STD free. Condoms don't protect against Herpes like they do HIV for example, and they can break. 25% of the adult population has Genital Herpes. Over half has HPV. I know several women with chlamydia. Herpes particularly affects one's life. It is disgusting, and can be transmitted at anytime. Who would want to spend their life with someone with digusting sores over their privates periodically who could give them those same disgusting sores?
I think Joe Francis and Rick Salomon are just as sleazy as Paris Hilton. How much respect can she have for herself and her body if she's doing those scum bags?
Personally, I'm not convinced that Paris Hilton is promiscuous. Stupid, spoiled, rich, useless? Yes. Promiscuous? I wonder how many men she's actually had sex with. But regardless, do you not see the difference between an unpleasant person who has sex with men you don't approve of, and a rapist who exploits drunken women to make money? Because you see, the first one doesn't actually hurt anybody.
Who would want to spend their life with someone with digusting sores over their privates periodically who could give them those same disgusting sores?
Right. Because God knows people with herpes aren't actually human beings or anything. They're simply never smart, funny, charming, attractive, kind, or pleasant. All they are are walking disease fectors. Why would anybody ever fall in love with one of those subhuman creeps?
nicole, i say this with respect, but i don't think you know as much about herpes as you think you do. i used to have same opinion, but have since been better informed. yes, you have the virus forever, but with treatment some people only have one real break out their entire lives. the virus tends to burn out over several years. not to mention that people with herpes aren't disgusting just unfortunate, and go on to find nonjudgmental partners. i don't think it is something i'd hold against an otherwise amazing man.
nicole, i say this with respect, but i don't think you know as much about herpes as you think you do. i used to have same opinion, but have since been better informed. yes, you have the virus forever, but with treatment some people only have one real break out their entire lives. the virus tends to burn out over several years. not to mention that people with herpes aren't disgusting just unfortunate, and go on to find nonjudgmental partners. i don't think it is something i'd hold against an otherwise amazing man.
nicole, i hear what you're saying. we all have preferences when it comes to who and how we partner up (whether for one romp or for life).
but can you reread your last post and think about how that would read to a person with herpes or to a person whose partner has herpes?
EG said it better but, yeah. yikes.
'promiscuous' or otherwise, sometimes totally undisgusting people get STIs. that doesn't mean you have to sleep with them but it's not fair to paint them as stupid or unworthy of any future sexual encounters.
Personally, I am one of the millions of Americans frankly fascinated by Paris Hilton. She is so self-assured and self-confident, she is in charge of her own sexuality, she is gorgeous, she is a successful businesswoman/model/actress/
singer/celebrity spokeswoman, she strikes me as smart behind the "dumb act", and she's a kinda wild and crazy too. (This is not to say she hasn't made mistakes, or to defend everything she's ever said, obv.)
Who she sleeps with is really not anyone's business here. I agree with Ledlight, women shouldn't be judged on how promiscuous they are. Sometimes it seems like it is mostly women doing the judging of other women, frankly.
Who let Derek Rose back in? Doesn't he have a bridge to troll under?
Well, I'm one of those "disgusting" people, Nicole. All I can say is thank goodness I didn't come across you as a potential sex partner. It's hard enough having an STI and feeling bad because of societal stigma attached to it without having to deal with b.s. judgmental people a la you. I got herpes in a monogamous, MARRIED relationship with a partner who didn't even know he had it, because contrary to your misinformation, people with herpes aren't always walking around with big open "digusting" sores. Having said that (and before people jump on me), the WAY I got herpes does NOT make me better than anyone who gets herpes via "promiscuous" sex. Having sex "the right way" (i.e. monogamous, committed relationship with all test results in and confirmed)does not guarantee that you won't get an STI. Having sex the "wrong" way doesn't mean you deserve an STI.
Every time we set up bad girls vs. good girls we are supporting patriarchy. That's what all this "skank" talk is about. Women judge and watch "skanks" because they can feel superior as "good girls." This is a false and fleeting superiority. Was it Audre Lorde who showed the fallacy in white women's identification with patriarchy by characterizing them as "well cared-for pets?"
Just remember, each of us is only a hair away from being a skank. It doesn't take much to tip over into the skank category. Just walk an inch off that line, and there you are. And while we are all so busy judging each other and calling each other skanks, men continue to earn more than women, reproductive rights continue to be endangered, and domestic violence is uncurbed.
At this point, since we're talking about the word skank, that I used, inaccurately, in my original post, I should clarify: I don't care who Paris or Britney sleep with or what videos are out there. I despise them because they're arrogant, no-talent, overprivileged twits. Paris Hilton is really the worst offender here. Britney went a little off the rails, shaved her head, showed her coochie, whatever. I don't care about that. The damage the two of them have done is to give girls a false model for succeeding by being everything a woman shouldn't be, and I'm not talking about the sex. I wouldn't lump Lindsay Lohan in with them, either, because I think she's actually a decent actress whose behavior is just out of control (and that part of it is none of my business, AFAIC).
The damage the two of them have done is to give girls a false model for succeeding by being everything a woman shouldn't be
But Flora, why do you get to decide what a woman should or shouldn't "be." (Maybe I don't understand the point you're making?). And it's hardly Hilton's fault she was born into privilege ... and I actually like Spears' music.
Coming to the party late (no pun intended): what disturbs me in the bad girl/punishment theme.
Exhibit A: Britney Spears. By most accounts, she did not have a substance abuse problem. She's a mother and she went out to clubs scantilly clad. Yet she was forcibly coerced into rehab to "fix" her. Guess what? Dressing a certain way doesn't mean she's broken. Maybe she's an exhibitionist.
Exhibit B: Paris. That was schadenfreude (sp?) to the nth degree. She didn't deserve jail time. People, including the courts, just wanted to punish her for being a party girl. Which isn't criminal!
Lindsay doesn't fit into my analysis because girlfriend has a serious substance abuse problem and, in my opinion, deserves serious jail time. Her behavior rose way about "bad party girl" and into criminal territory.
Uh, I hate to tell you this, Jane, but driving drunk is a criminal activity. People who drive drunk need to be punished, because people who drive drunk sometimes end up killing other people. Drunk driving is a bad thing.
Do I think it deserved the three ring circus media coverage, and do I think that Paris deserves to be vilified in the frighteningly viscious manner she has been? No. But she did, in fact, commit a crime.
Derek, you're right. A good role model is someone who does nothing but focus on her body (and don' tell me paris is a successful businesswoman/actress/singer- I wasn't aware that partying was a job, she had a few lines in some horrific B-movies, and she had ONE single that was only mildly decent only because someone else wrote it), spew racist and classist ephithets, and after getting out of jail for a CRIME THAT SHE COMMITTED, talks about how horrible the experience was.
Jane- you don't think that driving drunk on a suspended license (for previously having driven drunk) is something that deserves jail time?
I think Joe Francis and Rick Salomon are just as sleazy as Paris Hilton. How much respect can she have for herself and her body if she's doing those scum bags?
A lot.
You have a specific view of sex as a "sacred" act. That's great. Bully for you. Not everyone does, though, and it's not necessarily because they lack respect for themselves. People are into a lot of different things, and your moralizing about what is and is not "good" sex just contributes to the problem. So what if Paris is sleeping with people that you wouldn't? She has a lot of flaws, and I absolutely think it's okay to point them out, but that she made sexual choices that you wouldn't isn't among them. If the sex is between consenting adults, what business is it of yours?
Also, how do you know what her relationship was to any of the people she's had sex with? How do you know how many people she's slept with?
People like Paris turn it from an intimate act of love to mere humping between animals.
Which is bad... why? I'm sorry, but sex isn't necessarily a loving intimate act. Sometimes it's a raw passionate animalistic act. That's not your bag? That's okay. I'm not going to tell you how to fuck, but the minute you start moralizing about other people and telling them that they're bad because they don't knock boots the way you want them to, you're out of line, imo.
I believe sex is only apropriate within a committed monogamous relationship, and I would never enter one with anyone who hadn't been tested for STDs. This goes beyond morality.
This isn't a moral issue at all. Why should it be? Who made you the Arbiter of Sex? Yeah, getting tested for STDs and making sure you're practicing safe sex are very important, but there's no reason why you can't practice safe sex but not fit into your very strict set of sexual truths. Just because sex is between two committed monogamous people to you, why should it be that way for other people?
Every time we set up bad girls vs. good girls we are supporting patriarchy. That's what all this "skank" talk is about. Women judge and watch "skanks" because they can feel superior as "good girls." This is a false and fleeting superiority.
Absolutely! Well said.
RoymacIII, you are a delight.
When did I say people with Herpes are disgusting? I certainly think herpes sores are gross, and I wouldn't want them or look at them on someone, but I think it's a stretch saying I think everybody with it is disgusting. I thought my acne was pretty gross(not as gross as Herpes). Herpes is something that never goes away completely and can be transmitted regardless of condom use. I have a friend who never knows when she'll get an outbreak.It's painful. It's just a very unpleasant thing to have. It could be significantly less common if people didn't treat sex so casually.Is having such a condition(and risk giving to a future spouse) worth a few cheap romps?
I also have a real problem with the term "safe sex". Casual sex with a condom isn't completely safe. It's just safer. Condoms break and don't protect against every STD. Nothing replaces abstaining until in a monogamous relationship with another SDT free individual.
Lastly, did I see someone refer to Paris as gorgeous? I think you need to get your eyes checked. Liz Hurley is gorgeous. Faith Hill is gorgeous. Paris is barely presentable thanks to make up artists and hair stylists. She's ugly!
When did I say people with Herpes are disgusting? I certainly think herpes sores are gross, and I wouldn't want them or look at them on someone, but I think it's a stretch saying I think everybody with it is disgusting.
Well, you didn't specifically say it, but I had kali's read on it too, from this:
I also have a real problem with the term "safe sex". Casual sex with a condom isn't completely safe. It's just safer. Condoms break and don't protect against every STD. Nothing replaces abstaining until in a monogamous relationship with another SDT free individual.
With proper precautions, sex is absolutely as safe as just about any other activity that we routinely think of as safe. With proper precautions, I'm at greater risk driving my car- an activity that I don't hear people argue isn't safe- than I am having sex. And I drive my car a hell of a lot more than I have sex. If you prefer the term "safer sex" that's fine, it doesn't really change the point. Abstaining until you're in a relationship with someone and you've been tested, etc, is great if that's what you want to do, but just because someone makes a different choice from you doesn't mean that their choice is wrong. It's safe to drive a minivan than a motorcycle, and a lot safer if you never drive on snowy or rainy conditions- but that doesn't mean you're a bad person or wrong for choosing either one.
Lastly, did I see someone refer to Paris as gorgeous? I think you need to get your eyes checked. Liz Hurley is gorgeous. Faith Hill is gorgeous. Paris is barely presentable thanks to make up artists and hair stylists. She's ugly!
I think it's pretty ugly to insult her appearance. Why does it matter what any of them look like in regards to this conversation? Passing judgement on what she looks like is exactly the sort of thing that this thread is talking about- you're judging and condemning her because of her sexual habits and her body.
How is that remotely acceptable?
How would Lindsay Lohan et al be perceived and judged differently if they achieved sobriety? Part of what makes them seen as "trainwrecks" is their supposed "moral failure" to stop using and abusing.
But addictions expert Dr. Marc F. Kern says the treatment approach may be part of the reason - that the disease model is killing people, because it is stopping many people from getting the alcohol and drug help they need, that would really work for them. He says the disease model of addiction embraced by most of the medical community scares people, and ignores effective alternatives.
"We have a time warp in the practice of addiction medicine in this county," Dr. Kern says. "Would you put your life in the hands of someone who only has a 15% success rate? The root of why people aren't getting help is the shame, blame, uniformity, and religious overtones of the standard treatment, and physicians 'diseasing' the problem."
Continued in article: Beverly Hills Addictions Expert Addresses Question: 'Why Hasn't Alcohol Rehab Worked for Lindsay Lohan and 93% of Problem Drinkers in U.S.?'
http://www.addictioninfo.org/articles/1746/1/Why-hasn039t-alcohol-rehab-worked-for-Lindsay-Lohan-and-93-of-the-problem-drinkers-in-the-US/Page1.html
"I think it's pretty ugly to insult her appearance. Why does it matter what any of them look like in regards to this conversation? Passing judgement on what she looks like is exactly the sort of thing that this thread is talking about- you're judging and condemning her because of her sexual habits and her body.
How is that remotely acceptable? "
It is acceptable because someone said she was gorgeous. I think that is ridiculous. That is my
opinion. If Paris were known for something other than her appearance or sexuality it probably wouldn't be as relevant, but she's not! I remember reading people on hear laughing at Jessica Simpson and Adriana Lima for their abstinence. How is my criticism of Paris any worse?
How is my criticism of Paris any worse?
Shouldn't the question be "How is it any better" if you think that those are inappropriate?
I don't know what thread you're talking about, but I don't think it's appropriate to mock people for choosing abstinence.
If Paris were known for something other than her appearance or sexuality it probably wouldn't be as relevant, but she's not!
1. As I recall, she originally came into the public eye as being the heir to the Hilton fortune. In other words: For being young and ridiculously wealthy.
2. That so much publicity surrounds her sexual experiences and her physical attractiveness is a problem, not something to be encouraged.
I got addicted to the online gossip sites when I was unemployed for a while and looking for something to do- and I never asked myself why I was interested in whether Kate really was in love with Tom, or why Paris and Brit Brit can't seem to get into a car without flashing the world. It was a way to pass the time in between heavier topics, I guess. After reading this blog, I’m not terribly proud of myself.
There was an article in Entertainment Weekly bashing movie companies for making the tripe they've been making lately and claiming that it's "what people want." No, it's all that's available. I think the same is true of a lot of this information- it's not that we're so attracted to it we'll seek it out if these outlets didn't carry it; it's that the info is there, shoved in our faces and the problem is that we don't EXPECT more.
It's a feminist issue in that the behavior of women is more heavily scrutinized than the behavior of men. It's an APATHY issue that we see this stuff everywhere- not enough people give a shit about DOING something about what has become our media outlets to change it. We blindly allow ourselves to consume shit because we've become to lazy to demand better from our news outlets, our entertainment sources and our government. I'm preaching to the choir here because obviously, if you've stopped at this site to read up on current feminist issues, you're more invested in change than the average person. Give me an answer about how to FIX our apathy problem, our lack of expectations, and I’ll listen and follow. I am frankly clueless as to how to go about it.