Recently in Beauty Category

Fat acceptance is not about you telling me I don't look fat. Fat acceptance is not about telling me I am a good person, smart or worthwhile. Fat acceptance is you, seeing me, as sexy, bold and beautiful AS a fat person. And that is the purpose of the Adipositivity Project that photographs sexy fat women to challenge our perceptions of beauty.

Their mission statement:

The Adipositivity Project aims to promote size acceptance, not by listing the merits of big people, or detailing examples of excellence (these things are easily seen all around us), but rather, through a visual display of fat physicality. The sort that's normally unseen.

The hope is to widen definitions of physical beauty. Literally.

And that they do. Check it out.

Thanks to reader JustCharlotte for emailing us about this charming UK-based television show, Three Fat Brides, One Thin Dress.

In each of the three episodes of Three Fat Brides, One Thin Dress, three brides-to-be have just eight weeks to transform their appearance and well-being, with the prize of the wedding dress of her dreams for the bride who has the greatest success.

But how will they cope with the added pressure of Ms McKeith on the wedding scene? Will they make it to their big day a few sizes smaller? Or will they want to call the whole thing off?

You know, because women would rather call their wedding off than be fat. I mean, is this show for fucking real? It's the same gross sentiment behind We TV's Bulging Brides: That women only deserve love if they're a certain (small small small) size.

You have to find it funny that this is coming from Fox News. Because Newsweek's recent cover of Sarah Palin isn't airbrushed, conservatives are up in arms. They claim all of Obama's covers are flawless. Yeah, totally flawless.

This is not to say either of these photos are even "unflattering," but to make the demand that Palin needs to be airbrushed like a supermodel rather than, um, a real woman, is what's sexist here. Nice try, Fox!

Thanks to stuperb for the heads up!

Hey hey Missouri feminists! The fabulous Shark-Fu will be participating in an event in St.Louis tonight:

A Girl like Me: A Conversation About Race, Beauty and Self-Image

Wed., Oct. 1, 2008 (tonight!) at 6 p.m.
Missouri History Museum in Forest Park
in the AT&T Foundation Multipurpose Room
Free!

Join us for a candid discussion about popular images, race and beauty. The program begins with a short documentary, A Girl like Me (7:08), created by high schooler Kiri Davis through the Reel Works Teen Filmmaking program.

Davis re-conducts the "doll test" used in the historic Brown v. Board of Education case and sheds new light on how society affects black children today.

Sounds awesome. Wish I could go!

UPDATE: For those who can't attend, you can watch the film online.

Yeah, I don't have much sympathy for creepy modelizers. The modeling industry has enough problems, we don't need to add sexual perverts or serial rapists to the mix.

According to the LA Times,

He was touted as the next big thing, an up-and-coming clothes designer who landed a prime spot as a guest on a reality fashion television show.

But prosecutors told jurors that designer Anand Jon was in reality a "serial rapist" who exploited his position in the glamour industry to lure young aspiring models to his Beverly Hills apartment, where he lived out his sexual fantasies in a series of assaults.

Continue reading Throw the book at Anand Jon.

Posted by Samhita - October 01, 2008, at 07:50AM | in Beauty, Sexual Assault

So the last time I wrote about American Apparel's use of mock tribal prints and the name, "Afrika" for a line of clothing, it was a little bit controversial. Some folks didn't understand why putting thin, white models, in faux tribal and animal prints with the title, "Afrika" was racist. So be it.

UPDATE: I think one of our commenters put the argument for why the use of "African" symbolism is problematic and racist best here.

She says,

For people who have not been exposed to critical race theory or the study of colonialism and cultural appropriation, the new Afrika line probably doesn't look racist to you. The reason it doesn't look racist to you is because the attractiveness of the line is meant to play on the unconscious attitudes that non-African westerners have about Africa. Here's a set of association words:

exotic
primitive
tribal
jungle
wild
animalistic
hypersexual

I can go on, but you get the point.

Renee at Womanist Musings has a great post up, Can I Touch Your Hair? Black Women and The Petting Zoo.

Natural hair equals revolutionary because it says I do not covet whiteness. It says I have decolonized my mind and no longer seek to embrace the qualities of my oppressor. It flies in the face of beauty traditions that seek to create black women as unfeminine and thereby undesirable. My natural hair is one of the truest expressions of the ways in which I love myself because I have made the conscious choice to say that I am beautiful, without artifice or device. It further states that I will not be judged by the yardstick of white womanhood. My beauty is a gift from my foremothers who knew on a more instinctual level than we know today, that 'woman' is as beautiful as she believes herself to be.

So similar to Ann, I too spend a good deal of time reading about vintage fashion online. Guilty pleasure if you will but can also be a resourceful way to dress on the cheap. But sometimes my late night google searches lead me to the funniest places. Such as this gem. It is a wiki-how to be a femme fatale.

1. Speak in a low voice. Not creepy low, just attractive low. Practice some vocal exercises for a few weeks and it will become habit. Listen to Scarlett Johanssen speak for an example of this kind of voice.

2. Wear dark, sexy, retro clothes. Not too gothic-looking, though. Think Angelina Jolie in the mid-90's. Subtle, well-cut clothing that draws attention to you, but in a tasteful way. Stick to colors like black, maroon, and emerald green. Look for silk cocktail dresses, dark-wash, high-waisted jeans, expensive-looking, dramatic jewelry, and fishnet tights.

4. Be "one of the guys". This means means holding your own with the guys in their poker/pool/video games and occasionally winning. You'll earn respect and allure as a result. But dont loose your femenine side trying to hang out with men.

5. Be mysterious. Dont let everybody know what you are feeling or what's going on. The very mystery proves to be the allure of the femme fatale.

What does it look like when someone follows all this advice? Eeeek! Aside from the patronizing advice about not being too creepy, becoming too masculine, or having a brain (#12) isn't it funny that being a quirky, individualistic, educated, fashionable, sexy woman makes you fatal? Le sigh!

My sisters, some of us are like this without trying and without having to fit it into what is sexy for men. Let's try and keep it that way.

This is awesome. A group of women started a collaborative YouTube channel, Project LifeSize, which aims to give a voice to women of size, to discuss and dismantle ridiculous beauty standards and inspire young women. Check out the casting call above, and some of their amazing videos.

Make sure you subscribe!

And this time to add to the classiness, they are being marketed as the "Afrika" collection. Please get ready to see self proclaimed, post-racist, ironic hipsters near you wearing this fall trend. You know because this isn't totally racist or anything. This company well never cease to amaze me, in every way. (Unfeminist guilty pleasure soon to come.)

By asking for "unattractive" women to move to Mount Isa in northern Queensland to remedy the shortage of women to mate with the locals. Ew.

John Molony, from Mount Isa in northern Queensland, said the lack of young, single females meant that local men - predominantly miners and cowboys - were not as fussy as they might be when it came to love. Men heavily outnumber single women in the mining town, which has a population of almost 25,000 and hosts Australia's biggest rodeo.

Mr Molony suggested to the Townsville Bulletin newspaper last week: "If there are five blokes to every girl, we should find out where there are beauty-disadvantaged women and ask them to proceed to Mount Isa.

You know, this sounds like a really classy group of men, I am sure anyone would drop their life to find love in this environment. Yeah, I don't think so. I am all for shifting beauty standards and being open-minded about who you date or marry, but the notion that women who fall outside the unhealthy normative beauty standards, should run to the arms of desperate men, isn't really indicating these people have a lot of respect for women. Because surely, we women that don't like like the girls in the magazine are sitting around waiting for *anyone* to love us.

via.

This is just horrible.

Lin Miaoke performed at the China Olympics ceremony with a rendition of "Ode to the Motherland," which has already made her a national celebrity. The only thing is - little Lin mimed the actual song.

The voice behind the song was Yang Peiyi (the adorable girl to the right), who apparently wasn't pretty enough for the public:

Speaking on Beijing Radio station, musical director Chen Qigang said the organisers needed a girl with both a good image and a good voice. They faced a dilemma because although Lin was prettier, seven-year-old Yang had the better voice, Mr Chen said.

"After several tests, we decided to put Lin Miaoke on the live picture, while using Yang Peiyi's voice," he told the radio station.

"The reason for this is that we must put our country's interest first," he added. "The girl appearing on the picture must be flawless in terms of her facial expression and the great feeling she can give to people." (Emphasis mine)

I love that reasoning - for the good of the country. Like Yang Peiyi's performance would have done some sort of disservice to the nation. Fucking disgusting.

Picture via BBC. And h/t to leonie for the link!

Now that is one hell of a before and after. Apparently, beauty is synonymous with "whiter."

I know this is a bad (un)feminist guilty pleasure. And I don't even have a good excuse, like Miriam did in talking about reggaeton and feeling some kind of cultural affinity to it. But ever since I discovered spanx (recommended by another feminist blogger actually) I have been addicted to them. What are they? Basically, a girdle, a "power panty" if you will, something that holds in all in so you can put those super ultra tight unforgiving dresses on.

Alright, full confession. I think I am sexy with or without spanx. But feeling sexy everyday is sometimes difficult. I have things to do, like go to work, blog, eat, hang out with my friends, etc. What I don't have time to do is obsess over how I like in this or that which I do my best not to do as a feminist, but it is hard when you are constantly inundated by images of thinness, whiteness and richness. And frankly, if you saw me on the regular you wouldn't think I give it that much thought, I dress pretty casually. But when Friday night rolls around and I want to go out on the town, sometimes I like to look extra fancy and sometimes it feels better to wear something that holds it all in. It just gives me that ounce more confidence. So I go from "damn I look good" to "DAMN, I look HELLA good."

According to this post on Gawker, I should stfu and go to the gym. But you know what? I go to the gym. Mainly for stress reduction, but I go and it doesn't make me look like a super model. It just makes me look like me. Which is fine. But I don't appreciate the insinuation that I am cheating or eating too much and as a result I need spanx. What I am doing is functioning in a world that hates fat people so much that young girls don't eat and even a woman as strong as me, sometimes doesn't feel like she looks super. It is normal and I don't hate myself for it, one bit!

So yeah, I wear spanx. They are simple, they are comfortable and they avoid giving me that thigh chafe us thick legged gals get when our thighs rub against each other all night long. I understand why it is not perfect that a strong, beautiful woman such as myself has days when I don't feel fully fab about my body, but shit I am human.

Apparently there's some new trend of brides getting their bridesmaids Botox and plastic surgery and the like before the big day. You know, just in case American weddings weren't enough about unrealistic expectations, consumerism and all-around bizarreness.*

Some brides pick up the tab for their attendants, replacing the pillbox inscribed with the wedding date with a well-earned squirt between the eyes. In other cases, bridesmaids -- who may quietly seethe about unflattering dresses -- are surprisingly willing to pay for cosmetic enhancements. "Most women, when they come in here, they want it," said Camille Meyer, the owner of TriBeCa MedSpa. "They know they're aging."

For Karen Hohenstein, who held her party at the Tiffani Kim Institute Medical Wellness Spa in Chicago, convincing her friends was as smooth as a Botoxed forehead. "It wasn't me saying, 'Hey, we all could use a little something,' " she said. "It was, 'I want to do this,' and a couple of people said, 'I do, too.' "

But for every accommodating pal, there's another who feels going under the knife is beyond the duty of bridesmaid. Becky Lee, 39, a Manhattan photographer, declined when a friend asked her -- and five other attendants -- to have their breasts enhanced. "We're all Asian and didn't have a whole lot of cleavage, and she found a doctor in L.A. who was willing to do four for the price of two," said Ms. Lee, who wore a push-up bra instead.

Because real friends expect each other to conform to gross patriarchal beauty norms! It's better than the new "it" bag!

*I am not dissing your wedding, I swear. It's the wedding industrial complex I'm after!

Gee, I wonder why. It's actually quite serious, the cases of melanoma - the deadliest form of skin cancer - among young white women jumped 50 percent from 1980-2004.

The researchers recommended that more studies be conducted to find out if changes among sun exposure or increased tanning bed usage have a hand in this. I'd say that's a really good idea.

You know we have a serious problem when women are sacrificing their health for the sake of attaining their beauty standard.

*Photo from People magazine.

Any day that includes Sarah Haskins is a good day indeed.

"Now that I've shaved my face, I'm not sure about anything anymore!"

Marie Claire Beauty Director Ying Chu is answering beauty questions on MSN, and her advice is, uh, well...I'll let you judge for yourself.

Q: Do models shave their faces? Their skin always looks so smooth!

A: Absolutely not, and you shouldn’t either. Face shaving is such a masculine act that it can be psychologically confusing to do as a woman. If you feel like you have excess hair on your face, try waxing, plucking, using depilatories, or laser hair removal. You can also ask your doctor for Vaniqa, a prescription cream that slows hair growth in about four to six weeks. But you shouldn’t obsess over a little peach fuzz. I’ve definitely seen my share of it on models’ faces. The reason you haven’t is because facial hair is pretty much always retouched out of photos.

I'm sorry, but what? Now I don't know too much about the psychological consequences of hair removal methods, but I'm pretty sure that, you know, there are none. Chu also recommends women stay away from football, BBQing, and peeing standing up lest you suffer a gender-related nervous breakdown.

Thanks to Dorothy for the link!

It's no secret that there's an appalling lack of diversity in the fashion world. And Vogue Italia thinks it has the answer: the issue that hits newsstands today will feature only black models, and all of the feature articles are related to black women. As you can see from the cover image above, they're calling it their "Black Issue."

Now, while fashion magazines definitely need to make their content and models more diverse, I think this issue is an absolutely terrible idea - one that only further Others black women and serves as kind of a sad band-aid to gaping wound.

By creating a "black issue," Vogue Italia is positioning a "normal" issue as white. Not to mention, diversity isn't a black-white thing. This issue of the magazine makes women of color who aren't black invisible.

And while I think there are positives to the issue - the fact that it's getting so much media attention means that there will be more of a conversation about race in fashion - I can't help but think that this is a somewhat empty gesture by a magazine hoping to avoid widespread change. Because if they put out their "black issue," then no one can accuse them of being racist, right?

“Mine is not a magazine that can be accused of not using black girls,” said [Editor Franca] Sozzani, noting that Naomi Campbell has had several covers, and that Liya Kebede and Alek Wek have also had covers.

Ri-ight. What do you think?

It seems that someone thinks it's hilarious, oh excuse me - "heelarious" - to make fake high heels for infants. Yes, I know it's supposed to be funny and clever. But then why does it just make me sad?

Via The F Word and The Frisky.

Thanks to, somewhat appropriately, Mz.Stilletto for the link.

Attention women over 35! Did you think that your days of desperately trying to fit in with unrealistic beauty standards were over? Guess again! The new TV show "She's Got the Look" gives women of all ages the chance to feel insecure and unworthy!

When will the madness stop?

...for pushing superficial bullshit onto their players.

P.S. Subscribe to our YouTube channel!

This has got to be a joke.

When the warm weather comes, I always dread to go outside when I wear a dress for the first time and find men cat-call, whistle and - what's worst for me - stare me down as I walk past them. While I should be happy that the sun is finally out and I can wear lighter clothes again, the spring seems to bring the neighborhood sleazies out of hibernation.

The New York Times published this gem yesterday about how dresses are becoming out-of-date, in which the author makes a plea for the survival of dresses, not for the comfort or convenience for women, but for all leering men's sakes:

It is also, for what it’s worth, unwelcome news to me.

That is because, unlike Ms. Slowey, I am not eager for women to become 'a little more hard-core, a little more androgynous, a little more butch.' Yes, gender play is fun, and trousers are a useful wardrobe default for the woman in business. But unless you are Thomas McGuane and find nothing sexier than a woman with crow’s feet, tight Wranglers and suede chaps, you will have to concede that, for flattering a woman’s body, nothing is quite like a dress.

Might as well throw some heterosexism in there too. And women wearing pants is "gender play"? I didn't realize trousers were still a "man's" piece of clothing.

And it doesn't end there, not by a long shot. He proceeds to refer to the "classic story" by Irwin Shaw, “The Girls in Their Summer Dresses,� not surprisingly an unbelievably sexist story about a man who is explaining to his wife that he just loves to look at beautiful women while she begs him not to leave her for someone else. Here are a couple of other lovely references to why women should wear dresses:

The summer dress, in all shapes and styles, is preferred by many women, and by men who like watching them. (Photo caption)

From a 'retro' and 'Mad Men' garment, the dress was transformed into a wardrobe staple, to the benefit of women and those who get pleasure from gazing at them. . .

The dress, Jennifer Emory, another midday shopper, said: 'is very easy and very flattering — a no-brainer, really. It’s comfortable, and you can easily go from day to night. And guys like it because it’s so feminine.'

. . . And so, for those of us who take pleasure in the sight of a woman in a summer dress walking along Fifth Avenue, her dress caught in a faint breeze, a vision that calls to mind a Guy Wiggins painting or the famous bit of dialogue spoken by the actor Everett Sloane in 'Citizen Kane,' there is still time. (Emphasis mine)

In short, dresses are still the hot thing this summer so men can have their daily dose of voyeurism.

The sad thing about this piece is that it won't do anything but discourage women from wearing dresses this summer, despite some women's love to wear them. (Ahem.) I guess they didn't get the message that women wear their clothes for comfort and fashion, not someone else's fancy.

Thanks to the readers who alerted us to this!

Queen Latifah then:

Queen Latifah now:

Okay, I get that they're trying to promote her through this "healthier" rhetoric so that it's not about beauty standards - but conflating health with size really bugs the shit out of me.

(And yes, I realize that I'm a bit late on this one - but I had to post on it anyway.)

I don't know about you, but I was obsessed with Sweet Valley High when I was a kid. (Though I was always pissed that the Jessica character was the vapid one, while Elizabeth was the cool, smart reporter type.)

Well, it seems that Random House is re-releasing the series with a new modern twist: skinnier twins.

To publicize the re-release of teen fiction series Sweet Valley High, Random House Children's Books sent a letter to journalists highlighting the changes made to the content of the 1980s paperbacks. New cover girl Leven Rambin (pictured) was not mentioned, but just to make sure preteen and teenaged girl readers are sufficiently insecure about their bodies, the publisher made the "perfect" clothing size a couple of notches more restrictive.

In a side-by-side column comapring the 1983 version of the book with the present one, publishers write that the previous characters were a "perfect size 6." Now, they're a "perfect size 4." Charming. The next SVH book? Nipping it in the Bud: Elizabeth's Designer Vagina.

This is too gross. An online game, Miss Bimbo, encourages girls (as in under 10 years old) to buy their avatars plastic surgery - face lifts, boob jobs, you name it - in order to be the "hottest, coolest, most famous bimbo in the whole world." Yeah.

Children are given a naked virtual character to look after. They compete against other players to earn "bimbo" dollars so they can dress her in sexy outfits and take her clubbing. They are given missions, including securing plastic surgery at the game's clinic to give their dolls bigger breasts, and they have to keep her at her target weight with diet pills.

Perhaps even worse than the sexist and dangerous messages being sent to young women, is the cavalier response of the Miss Bimbo creators (both men, btw).

[Chris Evans says,] "But there are lots of positive lessons that replicate messages in real life."

While feeding your bimbo too much chocolate has added virtual pounds to the animated girls' hips, feeding her fruits and vegetables will improve her health, Evans points out.

That and diet pills, apparently. Evans also claims that the game is just aiming to be realistic: "The breast operations are just one part of the game and we are not encouraging young girls to have them, just reflecting real life." You know, the kind of real life where nine year-olds get boob jobs. Charming.

This article from the NYTimes from Valentine's Day talks about the decline in perfume purchases. It starts with a trite story about a woman who seemingly ended two serious relationships because of scent-related issues:

“He thought I smelled like a traveling carnival, the kind where they sell corn dogs, because I guess the smell was reminiscent of cotton candy,� Ms. Ware, 28, said. “This was the demise of Trish No. 9.� It was a bad omen. Soon after, Ms. Ware said she broke up with the perfume-averse boyfriend. She has not worn fragrance since. A more recent boyfriend fared no better after he bought Ms. Ware what she called “an old-lady perfume� against her wishes.

I won't even go there. The more interesting part of the article is the author's discussion of a budding fragrance-free movement, partially in response to some people's allergies to strong scents that are common in deodorants, perfumes and cosmetics. The conference I went to last week, Creating Change, had a fragrance-free zone.

Now a few workplaces and cultural sites are trying to become fragrance-free zones. Some doctors’ offices ask patients not to wear perfume because some medical personnel or patients may have allergies or asthma that could be exacerbated by scent. Some schools ask students to forgo perfume and even scented deodorants if a teacher has a fragrance allergy — much like peanut butter has been removed from some cafeterias.

What it doesn't really address is the fact that a decline in perfume purchasing might be due to an increased desire to smell more like yourself. It also implies that not wearing perfume equals having no smell at all. I'd argue we all have a smell, with or without scented products, and it can be pretty nice for some people.

I'm not so unhappy to see this decline (although 85% of women still wear perfume, according to the article) mostly because of the gender stereotypes that many of the scents promote. Women need to smell like florals and fruit, while men need to smell like musk and pine trees.

UPDATE: THIS WAS THE WRONG BOOK!!!

So, someone from Seal Press just brought to my attention that the book I quoted was completely wrong and the book that this show was about was actually boobs, by Elisabeth Squires and this show was actually about burning bras that fit, as opposed to having anything to do with breast cancer. See what happens when you don't watch TV! I still think drawing on the myth of bra-burning to feign female empowerment has to be fleshed out and doesn't quite work for me. But attacking body dysmorphia and focusing on what fits our body, well that is cool fer shure.

Sorry folks and thanks for keep us bloggers accountable.

Who would argue the importance of Breast Cancer Awareness? But Tyra Banks took it to the next level by having her studio audience burn their bras to promote the book B.O.O.B.S. Now what does breast cancer have to do with bra burning (something the article mistakenly calls the ultimate symbol of femininity, not something I have EVER heard)? How is it that in her attempt to cover heavy hitting issues, Tyra consistently strikes out?

We all know bras are too damn expensive to run around burning them. Let's be real.

Thanks to Cristina for the link.

After a Glamour associate editor's implication that being black is a fashion don't, the magazine has issued an apology and is hosting a panel today on "Women, Race & Beauty," which "will explore the culture of beauty, with an emphasis on ethnic hairstyles in corporate America." (via.) They've got some excellent panelists, including Farai Chideya from NPR's News and Notes and Daisy Hernandez of ColorLines. (If someone finds a link to a transcript or video, please post it in comments!)

The Newsday article about the panel also features a slideshow of several professional women talking about their hair, and how they've chosen to wear it. I think this comment, from Keisha Walker, is especially telling:

"It’s obvious that corporate America doesn’t care for natural hairstyles on Black women because you rarely see them wearing them there. People think that when Black women wear natural hair that they are making a political statement. And I find that strange, because I don’t know of any ethnic group where if the women wear their hair naturally, it is associated with politics."

And Ifeanyi Chijindu echoes that:

"Hair is a big issue with black women. We are judged by it all the time When I wore my Angela Davis afro at school, all of a sudden people parted the way. They were treating me like a Black Panther. I could feel this huge sense of fear."

That sounds, interestingly enough, like the Glamour editor's critique:

'No offense,' she sniffed, but those 'political' hairstyles really have to go.

Maybe that's a large part of why corporate America treats Afros, braids, and other natural styles as "inappropriate" for the workplace: Because they associate these hairstyles with black empowerment, and with women of color standing up for themselves and for their rights. It goes beyond the superficial racism of "this is a messy fashion don't." It's also about the old boys' (and girls') club feeling threatened by an empowered woman of color.

I find most conversations with people about the fetishization of Asian women mind numbing. Even when people have the best of intentions with comments like, "you can't help who you are attracted to," or "Asian women are hot," you begin to realize that often people are just trying to explain away their own or someone else's racism. Myths such as Asian women are hotter, or they are more docile and therefore better wives, are not only mythical and generalizing, but they hinge on essentialist stereotypes that silence the voices of Asian women and Asian feminists that have been shouting for years about how they are not your fantasy.

Carmen at Racialicious emailed me about this piece on Jezebel, that seems to be calling out the problematic reality that a lot of men have hard core Asian fetishes, but unfortunately ends up reinforcing the very stereotypes that reinforce this complex situation.

A bunch of economists are once again putting their decades of rigorous study to a societally optimal end and dispelling the "myth" of the Asian fetish. In studies of speed dating communities, it turned out, Caucasian men showed no racial preference at all for Asian women; in fact, male speed daters showed no racial preferences at whatsoever! To which I call, "bullshit." (Remind me to tell you about my "Asian" phone sex persona one time!) And I know because I practically am Asian that when talking about the AZNs we are allowed to talk about stereotypes without regard for the numerous and glaring exceptions out there, so here goes: there are a few reasons some dudes prefer Asian women, and it starts with the fact that they are very rarely unattractive, and they are even more rarely stupid, and they are even more rarely than that fat. They have really nice skin and they're not afraid to tell you yours looks bad.

Um, no. It is very difficult to talk about Asians as one whole group of people. There are a lot of different kinds of Asian people and sometimes, Asian also includes South Asian. And while Moe concedes that it is difficult to homogenize when there are so many exceptions, the reliance on still perpetuating the same myths that fetishizers use to justify their fetish, well that is not cool. I mean I am South Asian and you will not hear me say, "oh we are nerdy, tee hee, that is a positive stereotype, so it is OK!" Because in reality, the Indian nerd stereotype is often used to justify unfair work conditions or low self esteem in South Asians that are not "nerdy."

The fetishization of Asian women by the media, by men, by women, by Westerners, it is not just coming from a few people. It is supported by not only myths and stereotypes, but the objectification of Asian women's bodies through pornography that is focused on Asian women, the global sex trade that is disparaging in Asia and South East Asia and the culture of sexual tourism. It has somehow become OK to have racist sexual preferences, even in progressive circles. The thing is, it is usually one sided and that being white men, into Asian chicks. We are not operating in a vacuum. There is a long history of white men lusting after Asian women because of certain qualities they felt were "natural" to Asian women, qualities that make them more desirable than us loud mouth American gals.

I mean Asian women that are choosing to be with white men (even when they are racist or just into them because they are Asian) is their choice as well. I mean if they feel OK with it, who am I to say anything otherwise. But for the rest of us, that are sick and tired of white men being into us because we are "exotic," well this shit is just tired. I am not your fetish, I am not your fantasy and, yeah, I might be good in bed, but my race is not why.

A reality show about six year old beauty pageant queens. And their pictures look SO weird, like dolls, not even real children.

Dear VH1, please stop propagating this nonsense.

Thanks to Jenny for the link.

Let alone dismembered and made into fashion accessories.

Ok, now repeat after me. Dismembered women's body parts are not funny, or ironic, classy or a message for recycling (as in this case). They are gross and a reminder that women are continually objectified in compartmentalized ways, where they are judged for a piece or section of their body, not for the total being they are. Dismembered women's body parts are so part of everyday life, you almost have to remind yourself that it is totally fucked up.

I guess, I would like this more if it was done in a way that highlights how scary dismembered women are, a different type of art. Not trying to make something pretty, that really isn't.

Thanks to Trina for the link.

The anti-choice crowd, which is usually so eager to stop talking about women's bodies and start talking about fetuses, has been known to say that women who want to force pregnancy on other women are, like, sooo much prettier than pro-choicers.

So I wasn't really surprised when Garance sent me this image, which is apparently making the rounds on Facebook:

Even if it were remotely true, "our women are better-looking!" is not an argument. The idea that discussing the attractiveness of women's bodies as a point in favor of or against a specific set of political beliefs is just disgusting. And the implied possession -- as in, our things are pretty and yours are ugly -- is also revoltingly sexist.

Which I why I also can't stand it when people (especially those on the political left) choose to focus more on right-wing women's looks than their heinous political statements. It's. Not. Okay.

Apparently, in light of Bush claiming that we don't use torture methods in our war tactics (cough-bullshit-cough), it is OK to use torture imagery to sell products. Add a little sexy, sultry, brunette action and you are good to go.

It is all about sex and violence to sell products and women's hair products are so important that of course we need the strictest of *interrogation* tactics.

via Democracy Cell Project.

Thanks to Dianne for the link.

Today, the New York Times takes on a trend for new (and rich) mothers: postpartum plastic surgery. (With a really horrendous title, I might add: "Is the 'Mom Job' Really Necessary?")

"Mommy makeovers" are being marketed by plastic surgeons across the country in an attempt to reach out to women post-childbirth, so that they can get their, you know, "normal" bodies back:

In 1970, “Our Bodies, Ourselves,� the seminal guide to women’s health, described the cosmetic changes that can happen during and after pregnancy simply as phenomena. But now narrowing beauty norms are recasting the transformations of motherhood as stigma.

These unforgiving standards are the offspring of pop culture and technology, a union that treats biological changes as if they were as optional as hair color. Gossip magazines excoriate celebrity moms who don’t immediately lose their “baby weight.� Even Cookie, a luxury parenting magazine, recently ran an article that described postpregnancy breasts as “the ultimate indignity� and promoted implant surgery; a photo of droopy water-filled balloons accompanied the article.

Many women struggle with the impact of aging and pregnancy on their bodies. But the marketing of the “mommy makeover� seeks to pathologize the postpartum body, characterizing pregnancy and childbirth as maladies with disfiguring aftereffects that can be repaired with the help of scalpels and cannulae.

The Mommy Makeover website is nothing less than atrocious, with a slideshow introduction of "beautiful" mothers and their children with the text: "Embrace the feeling of being a woman." Which apparently means going under the knife.

So these surgeons are not only pitching this idea that women's bodies are "used up" after they give birth, but even physically deformed. In other words, while it's more than natural for a woman to bear a child, her post-baby body isn't natural and needs to be "fixed." (For a minimum of $10,000, I might add.)

There are way too many double standards and oxymorons to list here; all I know is that it never ceases to amaze me how obvious the war over our bodies is.

P.S. I second Feministe's request that the NY Times start to "focus more often on issues affecting more than the top 1% of the income distribution." Amen.

Because looking good in a swimsuit is more important than knowing about basic geography, or knowing how to answer a question. I am sure people in *the* Iraq and South Africa need to get taught by us good all-knowing, well-meaning, geographically gifted, Mericans. Interesting how when asked why Americans don't know, her response is Americans need to help other people know (what we don't know).

Feel bad for her. How embarrassing. Even Mario Lopez was cracking up.

Aren't fashion folks supposed to be somewhat original?

Via Jezebel.

For the most part, evolutionary psychology scares me. And studies that try and test what people find more attractive are usually full of variables that can't always be accounted for (cultural preferences, personal preferences, oh I don't know racism). Putting all that to the side, this study found that women are more attracted to "feminine" men.

Many women regard men with masculine facial features -- such as a square jaw, larger nose and smaller eyes -- as unsuitable long-term partners, because they're more likely to be domineering, unfaithful, unaffectionate and poor parents, U.K. researchers have found.

On the other hand, women believe that men with finer facial features -- fuller lips, wide eyes and thinner, more curved eyebrows -- to be more committed, less likely to cheat, and to make better parents, said the study by psychologists at Durham and St. Andrews Universities.

I don't appreciate physical characteristics identified as masculine and feminine as though there is a static way to look manly verses looking feminine. Why is a square jaw masculine? I have a square jaw and I don't think I am masculine. So I suppose this study relies on fixed categories of masculine and feminine to prove its logic, but we already know that is problematic.

Furthermore, I have met tons of men that are super nurturing and don't have what would be considered feminine features.

And what about gay men? Are they just not part of the equation?

But perhaps, I am missing the point. Is there some logic to this I am not getting? Superficial qualities have some role in how we behave?

via US News and World Report.

An article in the Washington Post covers the increasing "sexuality" of the 2008 presidential candidates. The problem is that in almost all cases, the sexuality of the candidate is not the one actually in question-- it's that of his wife.

In this long, hot campaign season, intimations of sexuality are sprouting like wildflowers along the road to the White House. Not that the commingling of sex and politics is anything new, but for what seems to be the first time in memory, voters are being confronted with questions that don't usually break the surface: Just how sexy is a first lady allowed to be? And what constitutes an appropriate display of affection between candidates and their spouses?

With a nominating field full of older men and younger wives, experts say that a youthful, even sexy wife offers a none-too-subtle message about the vitality of the candidate.
[. . .]

"What's going on reflects what's happening in the larger culture, a culture increasingly focused on young, attractive women and blatant sexuality, on display for all to appreciate," said Elizabeth Sherman, a political sociologist and Democrat who is married to former Republican Rep. Mickey Edwards of Oklahoma. "The candidate's wife is a strategic asset. How are you going to deploy that asset?"

Gag.

You know, it's bad enough that the media is constantly judging the wives of candidates at all (and let's face it: Michelle Obama, Jeri Kehn Thompson and Judith Nathan Giuliani are getting far more attention these days than Bill Clinton is, and whatever attention he gets is undoubtedly due to the fact that he used to be president). These women are scrutinized for how they dress, if they're too supportive or not supportive enough, if they follow the candidate around like a puppy or are "disengaged," how their views match with the candidate, whether they're nice enough, pretty enough, maternal enough, smart enough, etc. But now we're officially referring to them as "assets" that need to be deployed? On the bright side, I guess that it's at least more honest.