Brooke Hogan married Hulk Hogan. I don't have to insult her intelligence, it's right there on public record.

Stupid people tend to assume other people are just like them. So they always underestimate people who, for lack of better words, actually have their shit together.

Um, werchick? Brook Hogan is Hulk Hogan's DAUGHTER. She did not marry him.

Anyway, I feel bad for her. Her FATHER is obviously wacked in the head, and has taught both Brook and her brother a lot of awful crap. I'm not sure there was much hope for her. Sad.

This is a young woman whose talents are so questionable she has to take off her clothes to make up for it--no one is going to appoint her the ambassador for third wave feminists. Let's not get in a broil, either, when Jenna Jameson says "you can be a role model for women" or Phyllis Schafly says "Sexual harassment on the job is not a problem for virtuous women". They've all made a living doing exactly what they think men want them to.

I can't believe who all gets reality shows now! Is it like infomercials where you just pay a little & you can have your very own 30 minutes to reach out to the world?

Sad thing is that she is an idol for some people. I certainly don't see her as anything to aspire to, especially after that comment! But many younger people do think like that & her saying that on national TV just adds to the group think.

I can't blame the parents. After a certain age you have to be responsible for your own beliefs. Some choose to reject their parents views, & some choose to accept them as their own.

Thankfully it doesn't sound like Brook is going to chose anything. I would rather she not vote if stereotypes are all she is basing her decision on!

Thanks for the laugh. I love this blog.

it just dawned on me that the concept of a 'reality show' is fundamentally altering, or rather has altered, what it is our contemporaries define as 'reality' or what 'real life' consists of. Enter the young boys and girls and in a matter of years (i.e. today) we have Heidi and Spencer on a cover in every magazine stand triggering our collective gag reflex (those of us who still remember what dignity and humility mean that is).

So.. speaking of (un)feminist guilty pleasures, I am always watching Celebreality.. so I've definitely seen Hogan Knows Best and the Brooke spinoff. Her dad is sooo overpossessive. Me and my bf always joke that he has sexual feelings for his daughter.

Did "celebutard" or "celebuspawn" make it into the new dictionary?

She's an idiot so I don't take anything she says seriously. It's just obnoxious that people this asinine have a voice when others do not.

This is a young woman whose talents are so questionable she has to take off her clothes to make up for it

More to the point, criticizing this woman for what she chooses to do with her own body doesn't seem very woman-friendly to me. Then again, neither does hating on her for having "questionable talent", especially considering that talent is highly subjective anyway.

Hogan Knows Best is one of those reality shows that I could never really watch because the sexism was just so ridiculously blatant. The son could go anywhere and do anything but the daughter had to check in every 15 minutes exactly; the gendered expectations of what they could be interested in were strict too. They were constantly telling her she couldn't leave in certain outfits, yet her music career seems to be being built on her half-naked body. As if that weren't bad enough, her father is now dating someone who looks almost exactly like her and is the same age as she is. I know it was damaging for me to constantly have my father shoving his lust for girls my age in my face....

But what do you expect from a family that produced a son who crashed his car, put his friend in a coma, and then had the gall to blame it on the friend? (And yes, I do know way too much about these people.)

[Y]et her music career seems to be being built on her half-naked body

Her body, her choice. Don't like it? Be a grown-up - don't watch it!

What would makes matters worse is if Rock the Vote hired Brooke for an ad campaign.

Even disregarding the fact that women aren't actually rendered incapable of doing things by having different hormonal balances to men, does Brooke even realise that Hillary, at her age, probably never gets PMS anymore? And that the menopause has probably passed? The fact that people continue to use this sexist reasoning towards Hillary despite this is beyond ridiculous.

"Brooke Knows Best" caters to a certain age group who have yet to discover the importance of thinking for themselves.

I am ashamed to admit that I caught this as it aired Sunday night.
I am appalled by what she said, though considering the way she was raised I'm not all that surprised. For some reason I used to watch Hogan Knows Best, and Hulk's extremely gendered treatment of his children never failed to enrage me.
Women are so moody and craaaayzee but it was Nick who drove recklessly and put his friend into a coma. How, when all evidence points to the contrary, are WOMEN saddled with the unpredictable/irrational stereotype?!

I've often wondered how much of the "reality" in reality shows is actually staged and scripted.

Thinking back on the one or two episodes of Hogan Knows Best that I watched, this doesn't really seem surprising. That wasn't exactly the most feminist household to grow up in. As far as I can tell, Brooke's life has basically been one long purity ball (albeit accompanied paradoxically by hypersexualization), with Hulk literally breaking down into tears if she missed curfew.

I remember one episode where some music producer guy came to their house to record a demo with Brooke or something. He slept in the guest room and Hulk piled a bunch of pillows in front of the door so that he would know if the producer guy had opened the door in the middle of the night to go rendezvous with Brooke, because the pillows would be knocked over.

"Brooke Knows Best" caters to a certain age group who have yet to discover the importance of thinking for themselves.

"I've often wondered how much of the "reality" in reality shows is actually staged and scripted."

i've worked in television and lottie, the answer is "a hell of a lot." at least in the "staged" or heavily coached and edited sense. there's a reason shows like "the hills" seem so perfectly crafted to tell some sort of a halfass silly story yet in such wretchedly insipid dialogue.

How can you be so sheltered when you're so privileged?

Lotti, Mike--what virtue is it you think you're defending?

Well - her father is one of the most patriarchal people I have ever seen... so this unfortunately doesn't surprise me.

How can you be so sheltered when you're so privileged?

Lotti, Mike--what virtue is it you think you're defending?

If Brookes comment (line?) had been intelligent and profound and something we could all get behind (I know... this is hypothetical), I wonder if she would still be receiving the same kind of criticism? ::shrug:: Just a thought...

i've worked in television and lottie, the answer is "a hell of a lot." at least in the "staged" or heavily coached and edited sense. there's a reason shows like "the hills" seem so perfectly crafted to tell some sort of a halfass silly story yet in such wretchedly insipid dialogue.

Well - her father is one of the most patriarchal people I have ever seen... so this unfortunately doesn't surprise me.

Just out of curiosity, is there a mother in the picture?

"How, when all evidence points to the contrary, are WOMEN saddled with the unpredictable/irrational stereotype?!"

You want to replace one sexist stereotype with another? As if some dude crashing a car means something.

"You want to replace one sexist stereotype with another? As if some dude crashing a car means something."

Well, Qwerty, in the context of this family specifically, they could use it as an example of women not holding the patent on irrational or irresponsible behavior. They won't, but they could.

I agree with those who find it absurd that this young woman is being judged for how she behaves at work or in public, or for the nature of her job. (I note that actual sex work is being discussed without incident in the community blog.) It was my impression that choice and freedom from judgment is what feminism was fighting for.

I consider her statement "Like, I'm so moody all the time, I know I couldn't be able to run a country, 'cause I'd be crying one day and yelling at people the next day, ya know?" ridiculous, only because she would be holding herself up as someone who would be in a position (i.e., qualified, and with tens of millions of supporters and dollars) to make that decision to be President or not. I doubt she is.

I think the comments about her career being based on her half-naked body dancing around provocatively come from a place of confusion, since her parents were so overprotective of her (whilst allowing her bro to do whatever), and intrusive re: every detail of her life. And yet that did not extend to her behavior in her videos and on stage.

Lottie, I think there has recently been quite the scandal in which Hulk and his wife divorced and she started dating a guy young enough to be her son. But I don't really know what I'm talking about. All I know for sure is that there was definitely a mother in the picture during the filming of Hogan Knows Best.

I watched about five minutes of Hogan Knows Best and was incredibly creeped out both by how overbearing and possessive he was AND how he seemed almost sexual in his actions toward her. I'm not excusing her saying this (especially if she's in the position to be seen as some sort of teenage role model) but it's a pretty fucked up environment to grow up in.

Mike, I think waxghost's point was not to take issue with her showing her body, but the hypocrisy between her father not allowing her out in a short skirt then being proud of her posing in a bikini somewhere. Like, it didn't add up. At least, that's how I took what s/he said.

"I think the comments about her career being based on her half-naked body dancing around provocatively come from a place of confusion, since her parents were so overprotective of her (whilst allowing her bro to do whatever), and intrusive re: every detail of her life. And yet that did not extend to her behavior in her videos and on stage."

Again (I do not watch their shows and do not care), why do people feel free to judge her and her situation, while the default expected of any other woman is, that they are mature enough to make their own decisions; i.e., Trust women? Or is it ok to judge and look down on women we THINK we know something about, e.g., an underprivileged mother receiving public assistance?

Mike, by cutting off the first part of my sentence, you changed my meaning completely. I wasn't judging her at all for it, and I don't think that women should ever be judged for how much they do or don't wear. SarahMC and profoundsarcasm translated quite well for me, and I have nothing but sympathy for Brooke for how confusing that must have been (and continue to be). My scorn is entirely for the parents who foisted that confusion on her.

"I think there has recently been quite the scandal in which Hulk and his wife divorced and she started dating a guy young enough to be her son."

Here's another weird double standard, this time coming from the tabloids. As I mentioned above, both of Brooke's parents are dating people the age of their children. But it's only shocking/newsworthy if a woman does it.

I am so frustrated with the obtuse, deliberate misinterpretations of some of the comments on this thread.
Nobody is judging Brooke for what she does with her own body!!! We are judging her parents (dad mostly) for being a couple of hypocrites re: Brooke's personal life/career! And we are judging Brooke for what she SAYS. For chrissake. How can we possibly dumb it down any more? I'm hitting the hay.

This is slightly off topic, but does anyone know the extent of what Nick Hogan did to the kid that was in the car with him?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QFVWrPiEXA

(view the video)

Hulk Hogan supposedly said that this individual was "negative" and therefore had this horrible tragedy COMING TO HIM. The family later tried to retract these comments.

With statements like that, it's not surprising that is daughter is a teen slut who endorses sexist values.

To answer the question of where her mother is in this equation, her mother has started dating a young man who is about Brooke's age.

Now, some people may look down upon this and I can understand why it would make them uncomfortable. However, Hulk Hogan allegedly had a tryst with one of his daughter's friends which (allegedly) was the downfall of his marriage.

Recently I read an interview with Brooke where she explained that she barely speaks to her mother because she is embarrassing and "has made some weird choices" lately. Too bad, her mother is actually teaching her a valuable lesson about gender equality by doing the exact same thing as her ex-husband. The only difference is she chose to do it AFTER the marriage was over.

"With statements like that, it's not surprising that is daughter is a teen slut who endorses sexist values."

Isn't this statement a little.... ironic?

I'm really glad that when I was growing up, my dad didn't think he owned me like a piece of property.
Perhaps Hulk Hogan remembers his own misogynistic view of young women at that age, and of course doesn't want anyone thinking that way about HIS PROPERTY? Maybe?

Here's another weird double standard, this time coming from the tabloids. As I mentioned above, both of Brooke's parents are dating people the age of their children. But it's only shocking/newsworthy if a woman does it.

I had no idea Hulk was dating anyone, let alone someone that young. Talk about media double standards. The uproar about the wife's dating choices reached me through my haze of semi-ignorance about celebrity news, while Hulk's dating decisions remained unremarkable and unreported. Fuck that noise!

What is interesting to me about this young woman is that it appears that how little clothing she wears is the only choice she is able to make for herself, but I still think that women should wear whatever the fuck they want. Then again, we're probably all fooling ourself by saying that she completely made that decision on her own. I'm sure she has 'people' or something.

Don't you think that the decisions that people make are often predetermined by the environment that they are in/raised in? She is really young, and it looks like she grew in a chaotic, hardcore patriarchal family so I am not surprised in the least. Then again, a lot of women grow up to rebel against the lies they were told as children while others fall victim to it. Why is this? Ugh!

I too count celebrity gossip among my (un)feminist pleasures that I am not proud of. *disclaimer* this is all celebrity gossip, do not read, if not interested! One of the things I find confusing about Brooke's relationships with her parents is that although she was extremely upset with her father cheating on her mother with one of Brooke's friends (obviously), she did forgive him, and has accepted his new (younger) girlfriend. But she reportedly doesn't talk to her mother because of her choice to date a boy who is actually a year younger than Brooke. While I admit that would be very creepy and hard to come to terms with, I don't understand Brooke's acceptance of her father's relationship but not her mother's. I had read somewhere that it was ok, because, you know, men typically date younger women, or something like that, so it's ok. I understand that this is a private matter between a family, and we will never know all the details about what goes on in their interactions, but it still makes me wonder.

I did *kind of* feel for her with having to deal publicly with her parents' divorce and relationships and her brother's actions, all of which would be very difficult even in a private manner, until I heard about this statement.

Here's another weird double standard, this time coming from the tabloids. As I mentioned above, both of Brooke's parents are dating people the age of their children. But it's only shocking/newsworthy if a woman does it.

I had no idea Hulk was dating anyone, let alone someone that young. Talk about media double standards. The uproar about the wife's dating choices reached me through my haze of semi-ignorance about celebrity news, while Hulk's dating decisions remained unremarkable and unreported. Fuck that noise!

Actually, it's not the same. The woman Brooke's father is dating is 34, whereas the man Brooke's mother is dating is 19. That's one year younger than Brooke is. The age discrepancy is unsavory for both, for sure, but significantly worse for the mother. Dating someone younger than your child is pretty gross.

http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=53116&cat=2

Anyone watching "Brooke Knows Best" for her political pundantry has more problems than just buying into sexist stereotypes.

"in the context of this family specifically, they could use it as an example of women not holding the patent on irrational or irresponsible behavior. They won't, but they could."

Fair enough

I've never seen any of those reality shows because I live in Italy. I think her quote was hysterical.

"I think that women deal with a lot of emotions and menopause and PMS and stuff. Like, I'm so moody all the time,..."

"Nobody is judging Brooke for what she does with her own body!!!"

What deliberate misinterpretation am I making? Show me in the OP anything about her allegedly messed up upbringing or the hypocrisy of her parents. Point it out. "Brooke definitely doesn't know best" as in the OP is about her (lack of) judgement and her as a person, NOT how messed her upbringing or her dad are. So is referring to her as "stupid people" or a

"young woman whose talents are so questionable she has to take off her clothes to make up for it" or

"Sad thing is that she is an idol for some people. I certainly don't see her as anything to aspire to, especially after that comment!"

"She's an idiot so I don't take anything she says seriously."

People are definitely judging Ms. Hogan herself for what she says and does. On a feminist website.

You want me to agree her upbringing by that father appears messed up? Sure. I am also not surprised that such a man (or a woman who would stay married to him this long) would harbor or pass on such patriarchial views. Come on.

"If Brookes comment (line?) had been intelligent and profound and something we could all get behind (I know... this is hypothetical), I wonder if she would still be receiving the same kind of criticism? ::shrug:: Just a thought..."

Exactly! Ms. Hogan (like many other public figures or commenters) are being judged, because posters do not agree with them. Something just as wild from someone they can get behind, like a second wave feminist, or Margaret Racial Hygiene Fewer From the Unfit Sanger, does not warrant criticism. Has anyone read their way through the Sanger Papers like I have and seen her and her original cause in a new light?

So back to the "Brooke definitely doesn't know best" issue. Exactly how far should we take that argument? Apparently you believe she should not be trusted to speak or behave intelligently in public or choose her own job. Would you care to relate it to her freedom of choice over sex or pregnancy? How many other millions of adult and young adult women do you think are not deserving of trust?

"Ms. Hogan (like many other public figures or commenters) are being judged, because posters do not agree with them."

Ah, yes. And how can I forget the millions of SAHMs by choice, or the underprivileged women who dare to give birth to children they allegedly cannot afford, who get bashed by feminists on this site, for "taking" other peoples' place in medical school or whatnot, then quitting or otherwise "wasting" their education or experience by being a mother; or for "taking" "their" money (when it has never been established that they themselves are paying any taxes, much less paid more into the system than they are getting out). Even young mothers from millionaire families like JL Spears get bashed here.

Pardon me for repeatedly reading that freedom of choice apparently only extends as far as choices posters can agree with, or what they themselves would do in the shoes of another whom they know nothing about.

Hey feministing commentors, it's a good thing we have A male to come by and school us about the complex issues surrounding feminism and motherhood! After all, nobody knows as much about either feminism or motherhood as A male does.
And btw, A male the whole "Brooke does not know best" title is probably a riff on the name of her show "Brooke knows best." The comments thst she made on her show are ignorant, unfortunate and anti-feminist. Why do you have a problem with a feminist site calling out a media "celebrity" on her ridiculous remarks?

I love everybody's energy on this topic, but I hope that every single person who comments on this thread IS REGISTERED AND ACTUALLY VOTES ON NOVEMBER 4. My hypothesis is that the sorry state of US media such as the myopic, extremely short-term-focused, and superficial nature of the "financial coverage" at CNBC and the contagion of reality shows too dumb to invest 2 minutes in reflect the last eight years of a Republican administration. When Barack Obama takes the White House, I believe that the media will begin to reflect a more intelligent leadership. Here's a fact you should remember for November: When Bill Clinton trounced Bob Dole back in 1996, do you know who won the male vote? It was Dole. But women voted for Clinton by a difference of something like 14%, so it became a landslide. VOTE. I also assume that NO woman who participates in or at least visits this blog would actually vote for John McCain. Your M-F (not motherfucker) pal, CNBC Sucks at http://cnbcsucks.wordpress.com

Hey feministing commentors, it's a good thing we have A male to come by and school us about the complex issues surrounding feminism and motherhood! After all, nobody knows as much about either feminism or motherhood as A male does.

I'm not here to "school" you, except when I get pissed off at the numerous anti-poor (not anti-poverty, they are anti-poor) comments, and try to inform people how taxes are collected and spent.

I'm just looking for more consistency on fundamental issues like what freedom of choice or reproductive freedoms actually means to people. And please don't refer me to Finally Feminist 101, because I've been there, and Feminting readers and those on other blogs do not appear to follow or represent those views when it comes to underprivileged mothers, young mothers, or SAHMs. It's not a matter of Feminism is not monolithic, I IMHO see it as a fundamental problem when even feminists cannot agree what a woman, much less a legal grown adult woman, is free to do with her body or the rest of her life. I see judging Ms. Hogan for how she conducts herself or her career and how she allegedly compensates for her alleged lack of talent, as slut shaming. Am I wrong?

Ok, whatever.
Granted, I'm mostly a lurker, but my only point was that A male has a tendency to lay all of his issues out in a thread and make it all about him. I just find that habit a tad obnoxious.

I'm not sure of what this hypocrisy and/or double standards are, but navigating through traditional notions of motherhood and/or femininity with a feminist viewpoint can be tough and sometimes women have trouble grappling with what society expects of them vs/ what they want or need.

Hulk Hogan treated his daughter in a very patronizing manner and I wonder if this is a nature vs/ nurture thing- Does Brooke honestly believe that women are unfit to rule due to their biological makeup or is she just perpetuating an attitude that was drilled into her by her family?

This isn't discounting her as a woman in any way, most people do not have a fixed viewpoint at the age of 22. I know at that age I fancied myself independent, but I tended to be swayed to some extent by those around me.

Good god, A male. On a feminist website, feminists are permitted to judge people of both sexes when they say and do stupid, anti-feminist shit. That includes Brooke Hogan. You don't even seem to GET that the title of the post is a play on the title of Brooke's show. Seriously, your concern trolling and attempts to drop knowledge on us is disgusting.

Here's the thing, A male:

It's a tough situation, on the one hand, slut-shaming is wrong under any and all circumstances.
On the other hand, when women like Brooke Hogan perpetuate harmful stereotypes about women, it's easy to dismiss her opinions by pointing out that the only reason why she is famous is because of a combination of nepotism and a penchant for showing skin.

So, yes, it is slut-shaming and that's wrong. But, I personally feel that she's bought into all of the worst stereotypes that our society tells a woman that she should be- sexy, available (yet somehow pure!), lovably ditzy, apolitical, materialistic and controlled by the patriarchy. She strikes me as leading an exceedingly unexamined life and this is what would make me trivialize her nearly to the point of slut-shaming.
It's like formulating a feminist response to Paris Hilton- it's hard and you nearly always end up sounding like a hypocrite.

Feminists aren't perfect and I hate the fact that people expect us to be.

"On a feminist website, feminists are permitted to judge people of both sexes when they say and do stupid, anti-feminist shit."

Fine. Now tell me how showing one's body like Ms. Hogan is anti-feminist, when actual sex work is not. Really, what does freedom of choice or "Trust women" mean, because Finally Feminism 101 assumes a degree of unity.

"You don't even seem to GET that the title of the post is a play on the title of Brooke's show."

Sure I do. Does that mean that the opinion that she in fact, does not know best, is merely facetious? Does that mean the personal attacks on Ms. Hogan, her alleged lack of intelligence or talent, and how she makes up for said alleged lack of talent, are not serious?

"Seriously, your concern trolling and attempts to drop knowledge on us is disgusting."

What evidence have you that my concern is trolling? I do the same thing in real life when people talk shit about others. Why can "a male" not post what a few other posters of unknown sex sometimes post in disagreement with other posters or even the editorial staff?

The difference between Brooke Hogan showing her body and a woman engaging in sex work? One word- privilege and a lack of it.
Brooke Hogan is privileged- she could choose from a myriad of occupations or pursuits due to her family's wealth and status.

I don't want to generalize too much here, but I would assume that a lot of sex workers are in that field for purely economic reasons. Let's face it, stripping or prostitution will feed your family faster than a minimum wage job. Sex work does not have to be anti-feminist necessarily.
Choosing to spout off misogynistic remarks while gyrating over canned pop music when you could be doing some good in the world is rather suspect though.

And with the whole, "trust women" thing, women (like men) are not all unified, but we deserve as much leeway as the next guy or gal to bumble through life learning, living and loving even if we make a mess of it.

Feminists aren't perfect and I hate the fact that people expect us to be.

Anyway, I think that being called to examine ourselves in this way is a good thing, actually. Inconsistency in these matters can create barriers to our being taken seriously. So if someone asks where the consistency is, it surely can't hurt to consider what that person is saying.

Again, I'm just sharing thoughts on the subject in general. I'm not speaking about anyone in particular.

*headdesk*

13leslee said it better than I:

"She strikes me as leading an exceedingly unexamined life..."

I have not slut-shamed. Brooke does not know best when it comes to voting or women's potential for leadership.

Feminism does not dictate that women refrain from criticizing other women. We mustn't do it in a sexist or misogynist manner, or for sexist reasons. But just because Brooke's a woman doesn't mean she's beyond critique.

The difference between Brooke Hogan showing her body and a woman engaging in sex work? One word- privilege and a lack of it. Brooke Hogan is privileged- she could choose from a myriad of occupations or pursuits due to her family's wealth and status.

Choosing to spout off misogynistic remarks while gyrating over canned pop music when you could be doing some good in the world is rather suspect though.

Again, if I've misread your intent, I apologize. Sometimes things like intent get lost in all the text.

Feminism does not dictate that women refrain from criticizing other women. We mustn't do it in a sexist or misogynist manner, or for sexist reasons. But just because Brooke's a woman doesn't mean she's beyond critique.

That is what I've seen happening in this thread.

Your response confuses me, Lottie.
I was responding to A male and that fact that he said that sex-workers are the same as Brooke Hogan and we shouldn't criticize either sex workers or Brooke Hogan.

I never said that wealthy people (or women, in this case) should not be allowed to make the same choices as other people. What? Really?

I was only saying that privileged people (due to their privilege) have more opportunities career-wise in life than people who are struggling. Brooke Hogan could be doing a lot of things, but I find it unfortunate that she chooses to make misogynistic remarks over canned pop music. I find it unfortunate that she has not challenged a lot of the assumptions that her family placed on her as she grew up.

I have no idea what Brooke Hogan is capable of, but I do believe that she buys into the worst ideas of what our society expects from young women and I find that sad.

I never said that wealthy people (or women, in this case) should not be allowed to make the same choices as other people. What? Really?

Of course we're going to think it's unfortunate that Brooke isn't using her privilege and platform in a way that we think she should use it. But should our opinions factor into her decision making process?

I agree with the other things you said as well. It is sad that she seems to have bought into the misogynistic garbage her parents have modeled for her. But I don't think that justifies ridiculing her for something that we support other women in doing, as a matter of choice. Again, I'm just speaking in general.

I have a couple of questions, if you don't mind:

Do you believe that other, less privileged women choose dancing/stripping ("gyrating over canned popped music") prostitution, ect. only because they can't do anything else or didn't have other opportunities? Do you think that if there are other opportunities, women should make a different choice?

These are sincere questions, and I ask them with no assumption about your position on them, whatsoever. I'm genuinely interested in what you think about these things?

"'[Y]et her music career seems to be being built on her half-naked body'

And so? What's your point? All kinds of people who aren't musical geniuses have built careers on a combination of mediocre musical skills and something else, whether it's a style, good looks or inventive choice of songs to record. The point is, she's being singled out because she's using her body.

Her body, her choice. Don't like it? Be a grown-up - don't watch it!"

Mike-dude, chill out. That poster was not saying that Brooke's choice to use her body is a negative thing. He/She was simply pointing out how ironic it is that her father is so controlling of her sexuality at home yet doesn't mind her gyrating in music videos or posing half-naked in magazines. Her body, her choice--absolutely, but that's not what that person was arguing against.

I can't get upset about Brooke Hogan suffice it to say she embarrassed herself. Besides reality tv has little reality in it. I don't even think she believes what she said.I remember when Paris made her famous 'do they sell walls at Walmart'? statement on her show and she later when asked about it said 'of course I know what Walmart is, I was playing a character on tv'.

Alright, Lottie, I'll give it a shot:

I think that all decisions we make need to put into some sort of societal context. I also think that we all make judgments and decisions based upon our own particular perspective which is shaped by our personality and life experience.

(Also, I don't mean to sound condescending, but I'm a big believer in laying things out and using a lot of "I think/feel" statements to avoid over-generalizing.)

With that being said, I believe that our society has some deeply conflicted attitudes about women and sexuality. In the partriarchy, there's this idea that women's sexuality needs to be tightly controlled by men and men are often the arbitraters of what is sexy.

When women make a decision to dance/strip ("gyrating over canned popped music") prostitution, I think it is inherently problematic (not wrong, I'm in no position to judge).
Society gives us mixed messages about what you kind of woman you should be-sexy, but not too sexy, sexual without being sexually active outside the context of marriage, etc- I think you can make the decision to be dancer/stripper/pussycat doll of her own free BUT that decision is not without its' problems.

My stepmother told me when my father was about to divorce her, "You don't understand, I'm turning forty, my marketability is gonna be shot after this." I think this quote sums up my issues with how women buy into the fact that they are commodities in the first place, but you know what? that's what patriarchy tells them.
I hope this helps.

First of all, here's a link to the original video: http://tinyurl.com/69knnp

This is why dumb blondes who have done nothing to develop their intellect or personality should never get their own TV shows. History is riddled with excellent women leaders of yesterday and today, including Elizabeth I, Catherine the Great, Margaret Thacher, Angela Merkel, Eleanor Roosevelt, Indira Gandhi, Joan of Arc, and Helen Clark.

This video just goes to show how women are more hateful of women than men could ever be.

-The Dicknotist
http://www.thedicknotist.net

This video just goes to show how women are more hateful of women than men could ever be.

I think you can make the decision to be dancer/stripper/pussycat doll of her own free BUT that decision is not without its' problems.

For instance, do you think it's a result of what some refer to as "internalized misogyny"? Or did you have something else in mind?

Thanks for indulging me, by the way. I'm enjoying this discussion very much.

"This video just goes to show how women are more hateful of women than men could ever be."

Yeah. Right. That men desire access to young, fit, sexxxay women who want nothing more than to delight and arouse them proves that men love women. :eye roll:
Even if that WERE true, it'd be a result of PATRIARCHY.
Feministing sure has caught the attention of a lot of self-promoters lately, hasn't it?

Shit. My comment should read:

"This video just goes to show how women are more hateful of women than men could ever be."

Yeah. Right. Even if that WERE true, it'd be a result of PATRIARCHY.
Feministing sure has caught the attention of a lot of self-promoters lately, hasn't it?

"I think this thread speaks a lot to that as well."

That men desire access to young, fit, sexxxay women who want nothing more than to delight and arouse them proves that men love women. :eye roll:

okay, one more comment before i either go to the gym or clean my apartment.
patriarchy+capitalism = a woman who is not controlled by or provided for by her husband or father can sell sex in order to make money.

Brooke Hogan's father has probably pushed her into this field where she is selling soft sex under the guise of pop music. She may think this is all she has to offer the world.

problem a. this turns women into commodities with fluctuating market value.
b. the system devalues women as full humans and turns them into little more than a sum of their parts.
c. the system perpetuates the notion that men and women base their relationship on a simple money for sex model.

these are the problems that i have with it, but i don't have a problem with women who buy into it, because i think it's survival for many, many women.

I know that one of the things feminists hope to accomplish is for others to trust women to make their own decisions and to grant them the agency to do what they want with their own life (like Brooke deciding to be "half-naked" to advance her career). But what I want to know is where the boundary is between respecting a woman's decision to be a sex symbol, prostitute, or stripper and also realizing that some choices are highly influenced by the environment in which these women grow up? For instance, surely it's possible that Brooke Hogan just feels comfortable and satisfied with the way she portrays herself in the media and that's why she acts the way she does. And it would be bordering on sexism to assume she's not intelligent to make her own decisions regarding her image. But how do we also reconcile the fact that her gendered upbringing or simply the fact that our society is more welcoming to women as sex objects rather than women as...well, human could also have greatly influenced said choice?

Lottie--

There are certainly women who are capable of pursuing and succeeding in other occupations and yet choose the sex industry (stripping, prostitution, etc) or a sexy image because that's what they enjoy doing--the same way a female executive or manager can enjoy being an executive or manager. What I'm wondering though is how do we respect and trust a woman to make her own career decision while also factoring in how our society treats women who don't fit a certain mold of what is acceptable/attractive?

The thing that offends me the most about what A male and Lottie are saying is that they are taking, what, two comments in this whole thread and equating them to the entire feminist movement. Guess what, I don't fucking agree with those people AT ALL. You (Lottie and A male) apparently don't either. You know who needs to know that? The (few) individuals who are saying it! Why is it so hard for you to address your comments to the individuals rather than all feminists everywhere? If you actually recognize that feminism isn't monolithic (as A male claimed), why do you act like it is?

"I think this thread speaks a lot to that as well."

That men desire access to young, fit, sexxxay women who want nothing more than to delight and arouse them proves that men love women. :eye roll:

1. Not all men are the same, regardless of how much you seem to wish they were.

2. Your comment is a straw-man in more ways than one and therefore has nothing to do with my comment which you quoted.

3. When you learn some manners or figure out a way to voice your disagreement without attacking and slinging condescending comments and insults at people, I will consider trying to engage with you. Until then, don't bother typing my name or quoting from my comments, as I will not respond to anymore of your apparent hatred. Unless, of course, firing insults is all you're interested in anyway. In which case, go right ahead and show everyone what you're here for.

waxghost:

Every one of my comments have been addressed to an individual and/or responds to individual comments in this thread.

1. Not all men are the same, regardless of how much you seem to wish they were.

2. Your comment is a straw-man in more ways than one and therefore has nothing to do with my comment which you quoted.

3. When you learn some manners or figure out a way to voice your disagreement without attacking and slinging condescending comments and insults at people, I will consider trying to engage with you. Until then, don't bother typing my name or quoting from my comments, as I will not respond to anymore of your apparent hatred. Unless, of course, firing insults is all you're interested in anyway. In which case, go right ahead and show everyone what you're here for.

+1 for naming the logical fallacy.

Question, has a woman ever been an idiot without it being 'patriarchy's' fault? I saw it as Brooke probably playing the dumb blond rather than being one but if she was one she's a victim of male evil? there's a lot of freedom in not being self-accountable.

I have to say, from what I have seen of contributors like Lottie and A Male (from other threads as well), it's almost like they are deliberately trying to derail the discussions they become involved with. Everyone ends up 'explaining' their own and other people's comments over and over again, and (!) lo and behold, real discussion over.

Why do they struggle so to understand the other posters' meanings, when everyone else seems to understand the first time? Are we just letting them get away with a (sort of) clever ploy to undermine feminist discourse?

You're right. I didn't see that before.

But you are indirectly equating two comments with all of feminism by supporting what A male said, plus further acting like criticizing other women is automatically misogynist and unfeminist.

I was thinking that too, Valerie. I think that's why SarahMC called A male a concern troll.

What I'm wondering though is how do we respect and trust a woman to make her own career decision while also factoring in how our society treats women who don't fit a certain mold of what is acceptable/attractive?

I understand that women who may not be what society deems attractive may be funneled toward certain kinds of work; that they won't always have the same or as many choices. But that seems more the fault of society as a whole, so I don't understand why it should affect whether or not we trust and respect each other, as individuals, to make our own decisions or to at least know what we want and whether we're happy doing what we're doing.

Again, I have a feeling I'm probably not fully understanding your question. Sorry if this doesn't address what you're trying to ask.

Lala, you don't need to put scare quotes around patriarchy. It exists, it's a reality that we live in just like capitalism or democracy.

For example, I'm assuming that you're not sporting your mother's last name.

Of course women can be idiots without it being the patriarchy's fault, but guess what? We're all products of our environment and growing up in an uber-patriarchy like the Hogan family can negatively affect the way a daughter from that environment views herself and the world around her.

I don't really know what you mean by her not being self-accountable, she will take heat for this in the media and people will call her even worse names than they did before.

I completely agree, Valerie!

And I am sort of with you, Lala. Insisting that all women are intelligent, despite all evidence to the contrary, is NOT a tenant of feminism. Some people, both men and women, are just plain stupid. I don't think Brooke is a genius. I recognize that her upbringing has something to do with it.

Why do they struggle so to understand the other posters' meanings, when everyone else seems to understand the first time? Are we just letting them get away with a (sort of) clever ploy to undermine feminist discourse?

Thanks for the laugh, though. The side cramps are finally starting to pass. ;-)

...though it should go without saying that I disagree with your scare-quotes around the word "patriarchy," and the thing about accountability (not that I really understand it anyway).

But you are indirectly equating two comments with all of feminism by supporting what A male said, plus further acting like criticizing other women is automatically misogynist and unfeminist.

And I am not acting like criticizing other women is automatically "unfeminist". In fact, I explicitly agreed that feminism in no way forbids criticizing women; that the reasons for criticizing them and the manner in which it is done determines whether or not it's sexist.

But I must say that it's a bit unsettling to find yet another feminist blog that seems to try and squeeze out people who don't immediately join the chorus, by trying to label them trolls, etc. If you don't understand or agree with someone's position, that's one thing. But attempting to destroy a person's credibility because of it is just downright nasty if you ask me.

Lottie, did you ever think maybe it isn't the blogs that is the problem?

I'm Hispanic so actually I do have my mother's name. I have never heard of a 'scare quote' before.I don't know the secret codes and handshakes.

waxghost:

I figured someone would say that.

But, you know, you're probably right. Thinking for myself and speaking my own mind instead of conforming to what's popular and jumping on every bandwagon that comes along has always gotten me into trouble.

I should probably consider changing my ways.

The thing that offends me the most about what A male and Lottie are saying is that they are taking, what, two comments in this whole thread and equating them to the entire feminist movement.

See, I disagree. I can find A Male pretty annoying at times but I haven't had a problem with him on this thread - and I have a big problem with comments about her "talents being so questionable" she has to take her clothes off, and it's only OK to do sex work if you're a victim (ie: sex work OK w/ no privilege, not OK with it).

And I cannot believe the lack of response to that first comment about taking her clothes off. The feminist movement is certainly no monolithe but I was very disappointed at the lack of outrage at comments devaluing her for prancing around half naked. I really fail to see how it's relevant.

Hell, a woman who treated me like shit is really obese. Yeah, when I'm angry I call her a stupid fat bitch, when I'd never have a problem with her size if she hadn't treated me how she did. But I'd like to see how well that'd go down on here!

sorry to make assumptions, Lala.
Lottie, i'm unsure of what you want or expect out of the commentors here.

"I have a feeling that I'm missing something; that I'm not understanding the question. Because I don't see how or why society's treatment of us should factor into trusting and respecting each other to make our own decisions.

I understand that women who may not be what society deems attractive may be funneled toward certain kinds of work; that they won't always have the same or as many choices. But that seems more the fault of society as a whole, so I don't understand why it should affect whether or not we trust and respect each other, as individuals, to make our own decisions or to at least know what we want and whether we're happy doing what we're doing.

Again, I have a feeling I'm probably not fully understanding your question. Sorry if this doesn't address what you're trying to ask."

Sorry, I don't think I posed that question very well :(. Argh, thank God I gave up trying to be a writer a long time ago...

I guess what I'm trying to say is best told through an example. Let's say there's a young woman who decides that she wants to pursue a profession deemed "unfeminist"--such as being a stripper or prostitute. Some feminists claim that this is inherently problematic for the movement because she's involved in a career that's a by product of patriarchy (I'm not saying that this is my opinion. I'm just using it as an example). Yet, others might say that no one has the right to question or criticize her decision, especially a feminist, because women should be allowed to make whatever choices they want regarding their bodies. But how does one do this when it's certainly possible that her choice was influenced by a patriarchal environment (again, not necessarily my opinion, but I've seen this debate on other blogs and still trying to figure it out). If the fact that women are typically pigeon holed into roles of sex object or mother/wife and not really accepted in anything else shaped her decision, then did she make that choice simply because she wanted to or because our society funneled her into it?

Lottie, i'm unsure of what you want or expect out of the commentors here.

That would be really nice.

Incidentally, all of the above is what actually derails the discussions. Just sayin'...

AW, thanks for taking the time. I think I understand this time.

If the fact that women are typically pigeon holed into roles of sex object or mother/wife and not really accepted in anything else shaped her decision, then did she make that choice simply because she wanted to or because our society funneled her into it?

Regardless of what I think about another woman's choices, one thing I can probably bet on is that she knows her own mind at least better than I do. I would never presume to know better what another woman wants than she does.

Even if we suspect that a woman has been pigeon holed into doing something she doesn't really want, what, if anything, should we do about it? Do we try to talk her out of it? Do we try to get her to choose something else? I don't see how it's any better for a woman to be coerced by other women than by men.

I guess all I'm trying to say that I am willing to give women the benefit of the doubt. I do not want to become part of what I despise by assuming that another woman hasn't really chosen something just because it's not what I might choose, or because it just happens to be something that turns men on.

So, did I understand the question better this time? I hope I didn't rattle on like that for nothing. Haha... :-)

Interesting discussion, by the way. Thanks for taking the time clarify for me.

there's a difference between critically discussing a woman's choices, examining the societal context into which she fits and trying to coerce her into making another, more "correct" choice.

have you heard of any posters actively trying to coerce Brooke out of being a pop star? because...yeah, no one did.

trusting women to make choices does not mean that we can't discuss the ramifications of those choices on feminist boards.

also, after asking me to repeat myself numerous times about very simple feminist principles, you never responded.

and you know, that kind of thing also derails conversation...JUST SAYIN' ; )

AW, I think your question is a fundamental conundrum that all feminists who think deeply about these things come up against. It's a very grey area for me, but I try to keep in mind that it is patriarchy - not the woman who is trying to navigate it - which is ultimately to blame.

"I try to keep in mind that it is patriarchy - not the woman who is trying to navigate it - which is ultimately to blame."

Thanks to views as I see on Feministing, I now agree. Which is why I am against "blaming the victim", a concept I was first introduced to in a 1986 university course on social problems, but has taken me decades to try to understand. (I am undeniably guilty of some degree of looking down on Japanese women during my entire 12 year stay, for "accepting" their largely passive role in their culture and society. I also used to judge and blame victims of rape for not resisting, or keeping silent.) Ms. Hogan, despite being an adult of what I consider to be reasonable intelligence (not putting her down as a woman, but a reflection of who we are as a society), is still a victim, being subject to that upbringing and lifestyle. And I will always keep in mind how these shows are edited and staged. Please recall the famous "Wal-Mart" quote from Paris Hilton, and how she later claimed it was an act. I also keep in mind how Jessica Simpson is claimed to have an IQ of 160. One really can't tell about these public figures, entertainment figures in particular. (Oh, I remembered the current President and Dan Quayle.)

And despite saying "come on" about expecting Hulk Hogan to show some level of gender equality (yes, I judged him for his appearance or past lifestyle in character), it doesn't excuse him or his wife for how they've raised their family.

Oops. Perhaps you were responding to Lottie. Anyway:

"I was responding to A male and that fact that he said that sex-workers are the same as Brooke Hogan and we shouldn't criticize either sex workers or Brooke Hogan."

No, the only reason I am drawing an association between Ms. Hogan and "actual" sex workers such as prostitutes is that I find it interesting that actual sex workers are not only free from judgment here, but sometimes applauded as on the "sexworkers" community blog, while Ms. Hogan, JL Spears, young mothers, SAHMs, underprivileged women, etc., may receive such negative comments here. It's not about me standing up for sex work or the right for people to enjoy gyrating over canned music, to me, it's simply about choice, and respecting women for their choices, as in the slogan "Trust Women". And if adult, reasonably intelligent and educated women cannot be trusted to make their own choices regarding things as "simple" as how they behave or what they say in public, or their careers, based on their own life experience (which may include a healthy dose of brainwashing at home or through society), how can the unenlightened such as anti-choicers, be expected to allow unknown and anonymous women society wide, to make their own life changing choices? (Obviously, an anti-choicer trusts themselves or the women in their lives (partners, daughters . . . ) to be qualified to make decisions affecting THEMSELVES.)

"also, after asking me to repeat myself numerous times about very simple feminist principles, you never responded."

I was sleeping, and see things here have become too involved. I am not going to try to "prove" the sincerity of my concern regarding Ms. Hogan, women, or feminism, and I see no reason to. (I don't know her, and don't see why she or her life should be my business.) I don't see the same qualifications required of posters of female or unknown sex.

Believe about "a male" what you will. I chose that login because I felt it necessary last year to identify myself as not being the typical (i.e. female) reader/poster, but I quickly saw it was unnecessary, and unwittingly provocative, as I see numerous times in the, "just what we need - a male to teach us about feminism" type posts. For that, and for being provocative in general, I apologize once more. My gender neutral or female logins receive to my knowledge, no negative comments whatsoever, BTW. Perhaps readers would be happier if I played female to avoid trouble.

"and you know, that kind of thing also derails conversation...JUST SAYIN' ; )"

I am also just saying, quite honestly, that I find feminism confusing, when I see for example, some accepted authority or Finally Feminism 101 say one thing, then I see so much of another, like e.g., unadulterated bashing on young mothers, the underprivileged, and SAHMs for their choices, or devaluing the experience of women of color within feminism. Yes, I know Feminism is not some monolithic entity, but the issue of a woman's choice appears fundamental to me. For example:

"there's a difference between critically discussing a woman's choices, examining the societal context into which she fits and trying to coerce her into making another, more 'correct' choice."

I accept that. I believe no one here is in a position to influence Ms. Hogan's behavior or choice of a career. But the same is true of most misogynists who conduct "slut shaming" on JL Spears for daring to be pregnant or have a baby at the age of 16, which also occurs here, and I am sometimes not in a position to distinguish between valid criticism and e.g., slut shaming. For example, how concerned should Ms. Hogan or the Spears sisters be, about how their words/behavior/lifestyles/lives affect the lives of possibly millions of others through what they are "telling" young women and of course, men? Should they live their lives according to that sort of anxiety or sense of responsibility? That's a big burden to place on anyone of any level of maturity or intelligence.

"When women make a decision to dance/strip ('gyrating over canned popped music') prostitution, I think it is inherently problematic (not wrong, I'm in no position to judge). "

I also agree with you on both your points here, because I happen to be of the NoPornSouthHampton view on porn, that it mostly hurts women, and most sex workers in survey, have experienced abuse and don't really want to be doing it. People in such circumstances against their wills deserve something "better" for themselves (as THEY define or assign that value to career choices or a "better" life). In any case, I believe the people themselves should not be judged (beyond wondering whether or not it is a choice, and what can/should be done about it if not).

13lesslee,

I'm not sure where we got off track, but I'll try to answer you as best I can now that I have another free moment.

there's a difference between critically discussing a woman's choices, examining the societal context into which she fits and trying to coerce her into making another, more "correct" choice.

have you heard of any posters actively trying to coerce Brooke out of being a pop star? because...yeah, no one did.

trusting women to make choices does not mean that we can't discuss the ramifications of those choices on feminist boards.

also, after asking me to repeat myself numerous times about very simple feminist principles, you never responded.

I would like to mention one thing right now, though. You said that I asked you to repeat yourself. I don't think that's what I did. I was simply asking for clarification on some things. I thought we were having a nice discussion and I was enjoying it very much. I'm sorry for making you feel interrogated. I didn't mean to come across that way.

Also, you said that I was questioning you about very basic feminist principles. I think it's worth mentioning that they may be very basic to some feminists, but not all of us share identical principles. That's why I was asking.

and you know, that kind of thing also derails conversation...JUST SAYIN' ; )

Again, I didn't intend to ignore you. I will get back to you as soon as I can. We need food now! We have grumblies in our tumblies. Haha... :-)

Thanks for keeping up with all this today.

--Lottie

OK, I'm back! :-)

okay, one more comment before i either go to the gym or clean my apartment. patriarchy+capitalism = a woman who is not controlled by or provided for by her husband or father can sell sex in order to make money.

Brooke Hogan's father has probably pushed her into this field where she is selling soft sex under the guise of pop music. She may think this is all she has to offer the world.

problem a. this turns women into commodities with fluctuating market value. b. the system devalues women as full humans and turns them into little more than a sum of their parts. c. the system perpetuates the notion that men and women base their relationship on a simple money for sex model.

these are the problems that i have with it, but i don't have a problem with women who buy into it, because i think it's survival for many, many women.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the subject. I find them very interesting even when I disagree. I appreciate you taking the time and I really didn't mean to ignore you before. Like I said, I was trying to keep up with work and this, and I must have lost your comment in the shuffle.

Don't feel like you have to reply to this right away or at all. I'm shutting my laptop down in about an hour and won't be able to get back to my blogs for a couple of days if things go as planned. So if you do respond and I don't get back to you right away, that'll be why.

Take care!

Lottie, I apologize for being a jerk to you earlier. I interpreted a lot of your comments as being hostile towards the regulars, but I may have been wrong.

Thanks, Sarah. I certainly haven't felt hostile and regret that I may have come across that way. While I love this medium and think it serves an invaluable purpose, sometimes things like tone and intent get lost in all the text, and it's easy for signals to get crossed.

Anyway, no hard feelings here. And thanks again for your nice comment. I'm glad I got to see it before I shut this machine down.

See you in a couple of days. Take care!

hey Lottie, sorry didn't mean to get...testy. Thanks for the reply.

Essentially, I trust women to make their own decisions, but I think that our current system is harmful to women so a lot of women are put in no-win situations. Therefore, feminism should exist to give women enough tools to navigate through life.

Yeah, A male I wasn't really addressing you. I guess I'll take your word for it that Feministing commentors have slammed SAHM mothers and Jamie Lynn Spears while celebrating sex workers. I personally think that being either a SAHM or teenage mother is a rather dicey situation because I would not like being in the position of being financially dependent on a man. I also think that a lot of feminists try to avoid being overly critical of sex workers because for many women it is an economic imperative and sex work itself does not have to be anti-feminist.

Yeah, but I dunno, A male, there is a difference between valid criticism and slut-shaming. Clearly. I guess I just get a little tired of men coming into feminist spaces to tell women that we're doing feminism wrong. Is there any place where a woman can be free from the obnoxious judgments of some random guy?

I'm sorry if that's harsh, but that's how I feel.

When my sister showed me a video of this conversation with brooke, i was pissed.
I cant stand when people say shit like this. It really aggravates me when people think like this.

This was in Entertainment Weekly's "Bullseye" section and it missed the actual bullseye by a page and a half.
Thank god.