What We Missed.
Sara Ziff's documentary on why teen modeling is fuct.
How Aaron Traister at Salon embraced being a stay-at-home poppa.
A weird, jarring, chilling personal testimony from a "mail-order-bride" that probably deserves its own post but I am out of time today. I understand why she wrote the piece, but that doesn't change how deplorable the mail order bride system is.
World of Warcraft branding gone wild. Seriously.
Jill being the castrating feminist that she is on puke-face Guy Cimbalo.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: What We Missed..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/14231
That mail-order bride piece IS really creepy. She wanted her life to be like a Nabakov novel? What? Who wants that?
Well, she got it.
It's not WoW that's doing the branding, but a site that's profiting off the game itself.
It's still really frustrating because of what it says about the gaming world, though.
I wanted to comment on this too. Blizzard, the company that runs World of Warcraft has nothing to do with this, and it would probably be a good idea for you to edit the post and list the name of the gold selling website instead of associating it with WoW, Samhita, from a libel stand point. There's a lot of debate within the MMO community as a whole about the evils of Gold Selling companies, as they make their gold to sell to players by hacking other players accounts and stealing from them. As you can see, gold selling companies use highly immoral practices to make their money, so it isn't too surprising they'd do something as disgusting as paying a porn star to tattoo their logo on her breasts.
I think the story about the porn star and the gold farming site is actually fake. I'm reading at several places that people can't find any evidence of this woman actually existing, and some people have said it looks like a viral ad campaign.
Even if it isn't fake, you guys should totally edit this post. Blizzard doesn't deserve to be fingered for this.
Indeed. Blizzard actively seeks to stop companies that sell gold. I hope they edit the post for the sake of everyone who works for Blizzard.
I read the first page of the mail-order bride article and was bored...it's 7 pages long!
I'll just say that there are some negative aspects to "international marriage exchange" sites but for some people it works out fine...many women know perfectly well what they're getting into as well as the men. Yes there can be controlling and abusive men and that's not a problem but many men that use the sites aren't necessarily like that.
I meant to say that controlling and abusive men IS A PROBLEM. yeesh. >_
What kind of man uses that site? Why exploit the situation of a woman in a vulnerable part of the world? I dont think any decent guy uses those sites.
I just don't think it's useful to generalize all them. Also, many women who use these sites are not helpless nor poverty-stricken. Some are actually well-educated and are middle-class but want to access another level of wealth and know this is an avenue open to them. They know what kind of men are using these sites.
"For some people it works out fine..."
I hate this attitude. It just promotes the exploitation of women for whom it does NOT work out fine. The woman in the article was college-educated, and despite the ranking of women in her country and her family's poverty, she had other options. She may have made a choice that worked out for her, but by doing so-- and then by publicly promoting it-- she furthers a system and an attitude that exploit women who genuinely do not have a choice.
I'm tired of this belief that we're only responsible to ourselves. No, we're responsible to our fellow women, and all of society.
Regarding the "mail-order bride" piece, I think I was the most creeped out when I read the first response she received from her future husband, via the online service:
“I have a few years on you, girl…. You know that, right? What are the chances this could work long-term? I have been married before, and am looking for commitment. Steve.”
That first line seems like it could have come from a chat log on To Catch a Predator. Too fucking creepy.
I really wish I could comment on the article in full, but... well, I'm still piecing together my thoughts on that one.
I didn't like the "Plus, I was desperate to leave Ukraine" reason for marrying somewhat of a stranger.
I come from a culture where our men in the West fly to Syria and Iraq to pick girls from villages to bring them back to the US. This woman was very very lucky, but she is seriously an exception to the rule: men who engage in this type of "wife hunting" are interested in a household item, not a partner.
Plus, she takes pride that "she made it" on her own in the U.S. But she didn't. Not all of us have wealthy husbands who pay for us to be interns, assistants, and students in Manhattan. She had to get married to do it. Unfortunate.
I don't know. I mean, the fact that he's clearly stating his age and making sure she's comfortable with the age difference makes him seem different from an online predator. I feel like calling it creepy implies that all relationships with substantial age gaps are predatory.
In general, I'm not as disturbed by this article as others seem to be. I understand that the author was very lucky and that mail-order bride systems are rife with abuse and predation. However, people get married for convenience all the time. It seems to me that her story shows a better way for this to be done, and could be a model for reforming the system.
Most of us are privileged to have other options besides marriage. It sounds like the author did not have many other avenues, so I don't think it's right to condemn her choice of using marriage as a path to success. She seems like she knew what she was doing, meeting her husband a few times before committing and ignoring the creeps, and was pretty proactive in doing what she wanted.
“I have a few years on you, girl…. You know that, right? What are the chances this could work long-term? I have been married before, and am looking for commitment. Steve.”
The girl: I don't know how you can be missing just how creepy this guy really is!!
Calling a grown woman "girl" and talking to her like she is a three year old is not my idea of "making her aware" of anything!!
He's talking right down to her!! I have been talked to like thid before by some men....and there is NO WAY I would carry on a conversation with them....let alone marry them!!
That's what I took from it, too. She has a name. "Girl" is not a replacement for it, especially since she's not a girl, she's a woman.
That girl PS: my apols: I got your name wrong. I put the girl.
Um, I'm sure it said his age in his profile. Unless he was assuming she didn't know how to do basic math (a terrible assumption, I might add), he had no real reason to say that except to EMPHASIZE the age difference. I've dealt with guys like that, and they get a kick out of it, because they see it as one more way in which they have power over you.
I do not care what the article says. Other people meet on match and myspace and what not, why do some women feel the need to feed websites that charge their customers thousands ?
Re: the modelling article, I am uncomfortable with the quote "but at the end of the day I used to wonder: what's the difference between doing a shoot in your underwear for Calvin Klein and being a stripper? Obviously you are compromising yourself. How far am I willing to go? How much am I willing to show for a big fat cheque?""
The difference? Not a lot. Modelling is not "better" than stripping, and models sure as hell are not better people than strippers. Because if you're selling images of your body for other's titillation it really is much of a muchness.
I read that quote to mean exactly the same thing that you say. I don't understand why it makes you uncomfortable; you seem to agree.
I think Hrovitnir may have been uncomfortable because of the disgust expressed by a model at the idea of being like a stripper, when modeling is a career that inherently requires women to sell their physical looks for the viewing pleasure of others (there are a lot of hidden aspects to the industry, as the article demonstrates, but that's not one of them).
In other words, why is the idea of being like a stripper so bothersome to her? Because it's not a fashionable job, like modeling? Because she thinks she's better than that?
I guess I took it to mean something else; I didn't see the statement as her trying to make modeling better than any other type of sex work, I saw it as her trying to make the connection herself, to show it for what it is. I didn't read the disgust or condescension. I read it as a woman acknowledging that she grapples with the some of the same issues that other women in sex industries do.
Despite Hrovitnir's use of quotes around the word 'better', that word was not in the apparently bothersome quote. Value judgments here have been inferred. lets give the speaker the benefit of the doubt and assume she's just trying to engage herself/ her audience in the same kinds of philosophical questions that many of us here engage in all the time. I think that the fact that she doesn't deign to answer her own question is an invitation to us to try; she doesn't try to say that modeling is any better, she is inviting us to think about the similarities and differences in the two industries as they are practiced and regarded. Clearly, based on her film, she is not in the business of aggrandizing the modeling industry.
I do not see how strippers are bad people. Legalize prostitution, but boo stripping ? Wtf.
I didn't really see how the article on the mail-order bride was "chilling."
She got what she wanted, and she was very lucky to end up finding someone who doesn't seem like a creep who she likes. She seems happy.
Yes, it's unfortunate that women feel as if they have no choice other than to create a profile through a mail-order bride agency, but her story was more...happy to me.
There was a lot about it that was chilling. Start by reading some of our comments here if you really don't see it for yourself.
You do seem to get part of it, though... but you brush it aside just like the article does: the fact that, for most women and girls, it does NOT work out like that.
The teen modeling article gives me the creeps... thinking sexual assault and statutory rape are just "part of the job"? Agencies that don't bother to ensure a girl has a supervising escort on the job, even though as an employer they have obligations to employees who are minors? No doubt they assured the parents their daughters would be well-supervised but discouraged parents from doing the supervising. Hell, the one agency said that rather than just standing there and doing nothing as she was assaulted in a hallway, she should have offered to sleep with him to lock up the next campaign.
It's not that I'm surprised--young models being treated like objects and taken advantage of by older men with the power to end their careers with a phone call? Shocking!--it's that I feel sick to my stomach. We regularly deplore the pressure that media puts on female audiences, but sometimes we fail to think about what it does to those being used to set the standard, particularly underage girls. I don't doubt the film's implication that anorexia is common not just due to industry pressure to be thin but also because of the lack of control experienced most acutely by the youngest models. No matter what the wages, the experiences she describes are child exploitation and should be treated as such. Even for models over 18, the power balance between models and photographers (who seem to be overwhelmingly male at the top) seems such that it is hard to imagine similar exploitation is not carried out.
Sorry for the novel, but that article made me want to vomit and/or cry.
The story is not worse than I imagined it can be (in Japan, teen idols female and male be they models, actors, singers, comedians or whatnot are openly treated in a really atrocious manner, including bullying, sexual harassment and assault, regularly treated as fodder for laughs on prime time TV), but it does beg the question, how informed are young people really, even young adults, about going into that kind of work?
Was the marriage piece "jarring" and "chilling" because it conflicted with your pre-conceived notions of what this type of marriage is?
Old Westerner's wives die or leave them. They are lonely. Women in poor countries like the Philippines or Ukraine want to leave their miserable lives. These two people meet and make each other happy. What right do you have to say it is bad just because it goes against what you would like in your own personal life? Aren't you a supporter of Choice?
And, of course, it's easy for you to look down on these women while you are living a comfortable Western lifestyle. Spend a few months working at a call center or a shoe factory in the Philippines, and you might realize there are much worse lives than marrying an old man who adores you.
Except that maybe, just maybe, there ought to be a better way for women to attain good lives aside from selling themselves. Maybe, we in the "developed" world should be doing more productive things to make people's lives in other countries less miserable rather than advocate for (at least, at first) loveless marriages. Yes, some women might do so willingly and perhaps even happily, but there must be a better way. There is a reason why the stereotype for mail-order brides' husbands, it's because it's an easy way to gain someone over whom you have complete economic and social control. No one is looking down on them. Why don't you spend a few months working at a call center or a shoe factory in the Philippines and then be given as the only alternative a marriage to some old person you don't know, or worse, end up with someone who doesn't marry you at all and keeps you as a slave in the US? It happens.
Yes, Heina, and it would be wonderful if I crapped gold and could sell it on Ebay, but that's not the way the world works. It's wonderful for you to want the living standards of people in the Philippines to be better, but your wishing does not change the fact that life sucks there. So until things get better, i think it's utterly brilliant that there is a way for the girl to escape that life of solitude and for the man to escape his life of loneliness and for both of them to be rescuing each other. And trying to stigmatize or shame it will only lead to the human trafficking that you (rightfully) hate so much. As long as it is in the open, we can take efforts to make sure the women are protected when they come over. You remind me of the so-called feminists who want to keep prostitution illegal, thereby ignoring the fact that keeping it in the shadows results in murders, rapes and beatings.
There's the way you want the world to be and there's the way it is. If you fix the Philippines, the Ukraine will still be impoverished. Fix the Ukraine, Vietnam will be impoverished. The entire world will never be wealthy (not in our lifetime, at least). So it's a good thing for us to be able to protect these women by keeping the practice open and regulated.
I've been to the Philippines. I've seen the girls walking around with giant smiles on their faces as they are with their future husband/sugardaddy. There are much worse ways for them to be making money - I saw those too while in the Philippines.
Your comments are unnecessarily nasty. Maybe the piece is 'chilling' because of her attitude (the 'Nabakov' quote') or his attitude (the 'you know how old I am GIRL?' quote) or maybe it's because it glosses over the terrible reality of the mail-order bride industry that most women and girls and up enduring.
You know nothing of my view on prostitution. I am not wishing and I am not shaming, and I am surely not stigmatizing. I do not attack those who participate, I criticize what causes the institution in the first place.
And, I don't know, calling someone brilliant for taking advantage of the fact that some women live in terrible despair is kind of, well, messed up.
i think its kind of fucked up to use the word "chilling" for the mail order bride piece.
the author doesnt pretend that all situations end up like hers, and admits to being fairly ignorant about how common abuse is. she says that she realized later that she was taking a gamble but that she was very lucky.
i think it is positive to show that women who use those services are doing so for a reason, have respect for themselves, and are not poor little victims, as they are often portrayed.
i find it similar to the practice of arranged marriages in my south asian culture. while i would never do that (obvi, cuz im gay but even if i wasnt...), i cant deny that it has worked out in really positive ways for a lot of people. it has its downsides too, of course, but more and more people are open to talking about them.
the author explored the bad sides of the practice and also showed how her experience was unique. i just think it is offensive to try to make her into a victim if that's not how she feels.
No one is saying she's a poor little victim. I think what's chilling about it is that marrying someone who could have quite possibly exploited her and had total control over her economic and social well-being was her only way to escape a situation in which she didn't want to be. It's offensive, to me, that we live in a society where we defend practices based on one good example whilst ignoring all the other cases where things aren't so rosy. Who will speak for all the women who immigrate here only to be kept as domestic and/or sexual slaves? It's called human trafficking and it's a real problem, and the problem with the article is that it ignores that fact (except for a cursory mention of potential danger of which she was self-admittedly unaware) and empowers people to make statements like, "well, okay, mail-ordering brides is awesome then! I had no idea good things could come of it! Why are all those damn feminists mad about it?"
Again, who will speak for all the women who immigrate here only to be kept as domestic and/or sexual slaves? Most of them are not educated daughters of "intellectuals" or whatever who get to go to school in the US before getting hitched to someone who turns out awesome. And they're certainly not getting a snazzy, sassy article in a well-known women's magazine.
I only spent six months in Thailand, but it was long enough for me to notice the incredible prevalence of sex tourism. Any white man, regardless of his obvious sleaze, will immediately be fawned over by beautiful young women as soon as he enters a major Thai city. Yes, I am a western woman who has always had food and shelter. But I still believe that any trend that elevates the undeserved power of white men over women of color should be challenged, and that includes the "mail-order bride" system.
World of Warcraft branding gone wild. Seriously.
Edit that statement in some way.
It is not "World of Warcraft branding gone wild".
The link mentions a gold-farming site/service.
Which are a violation of the Warcraft terms of service, both for buying and selling, not endorsed by Blizzard in anyway, and in fact, actively pursued and shut down by Blizzard if at all possible.
You make it appear it's something endorsed by Blizzard, and that could very well cause a lot of angry letters fired at the wrong target.
Re: The stay-at-home dad piece... we definitely need to see more articles like this in the mainstream media. It is not enough to encourage women to join the workforce. We need to remind men that their masculinity is not somehow threatened if they do the opposite and stay at home.
I haven't read the Cimbola article, but from what I can tell, he lists right-wing women who he'd like to screw, even though he otherwise can't stand them (he wants to "hate-fuck" them, in other words). Other than the typical selection of women based on whether they give him a hard-on (it is Playboy, after all) what exactly is the reason for all the hysteria?
For the record, I think Mitt Romney is a weasel and I'd never vote for him. On the other hand, he is very handsome and a sharp dresser, so I could see where a few liberal women or gay men might think "I can't stand this guy, but I'd still hit it!" and there's nothing wrong with that.
Because some people don't think rape is funny?
The article had nothing to do with rape. You might as well say you didn't like the article because of 9/11.
So "hate-fuck" is a term that means "respectful romantic relationship between equals"?
Wow! The dictionary changes every day.
Where did I say such a thing?
You have a habit or reading things other people never wrote.
Well, just because people don't like either other doesn't mean they can't have consensual sex.
*each other
Well, the article has been taken down it seems.
But from what I've seen, hate, in the case of 'hate fuck', is not the opposite of dislike. It's not 'I hate anchovies', hate. It's I hate you so much that I've decided you're not worthy of a minimum of human dignity and compassion; and the fucking that you'll get will reflect this.
The more common sense of the word seems to be rough sex as a form of punishment. The use of the term in this context implies at minimum some false pretenses and deception (unless you think that it's reasonable to expect people to willingly volunteer themselves as target of a hate-fuck).
Every other reference in our culture to sex being used as a punishment (real punishment not kink) involves extreme cruelty. I wouldn't be so quick to rush to the defense of this term.
Are you telling me you've never once thought:
Never?
I'm with you, Newbomb - I've never heard "hatefuck" referred to in any sense implying rape. The most common scenario for the use of this word seems to be recently broken-up couples that are arguing passionately and then end up having crazy, intense sex even though, in their heads, they don't really like the other person. I guess you could call that mutual rape? But that sort of... is an oxymoron.
Mail-order bride piece: While I was happy that her situation came out great for her, I still wasn't greatly comfortable with the tone, that why would people have all of these misconceptions? Except she knows there is plenty of abuse and misinformation about the system? I mean, why was she surprised? She gives a quick mention to other mail order bride's maltreatment, but to me it came off as "but I'm independent and I picked a hot young(er) husband and we met a few times, therefore I was smart and better than that." Was she really? She was still a young, poor, desperate woman who was willing to risk a lot to come to the US. Is that to imply that women who do have abusive husbands or end up in worse situations after their brokered-marriage ends in divorce are stupid/deserve it? Especially the bit about how she thinks other dating situations are worse. Plus, and perhaps I am wrong, but Glamour doesn't publish unhappy stories. The presentation of one happy story with the ignorance of lots of unhappy ones and some okay ones I think does present a false picture of the mail-order bride industry.
It is kind of like Dan Savage's stories from people who met their long-term relationship partners after random sex in a public restroom. Was it nice it ended up well for them? Yeah. Does it mean it is a good idea or not fraught with peril? No. Is anyone going to be surprised there are misconceptions about the start of that relationship?
As to the models/strippers comment from Sara Ziff, I did take the comment as "strippers do things I dislike, but it is the same as what I do, so why am I doing it?" Which everyone has different perspectives as to what is right or wrong in terms of what they are comfortable with, and if it takes that kind of thinking to start doing what makes you happy, it is fine with me. I wouldn't take it as necessarily "I think strippers are dirty/wrong and what I did was nice/good," although it isn't like that is an unusual perspective.
I think the thing that bothers me most about the "Mail-Order Bride" piece, is the overall tone. I am so glad she is safe and feels loved and all, but I can't help feeling like Glamour wants to smooth over the issue by saying, "Look what we found. A totally well-adjusted, stylish Manhattan resident who just happens to be a mail order bride. See, America! It's not as bad as we think."
I think she's the exception to the rule, here. I just don't feel right about promoting this in such a way.
Mail Order Bride: I'm glad she's happy, but the article completely glosses over the systemic problems that led her to this choice--i.e. Why doesn't the US increase visas for single women in poor countries? Why doesn't the US abolish the automatic visa through marriage rule?
Overrall, I just really dislike that the article positions Rich Western White Men as saviors. Yes, please, let's perpetuate stereotypes.