Dove hired a forensic artist to draw how women see themselves versus how others see them - the results are moving.
I don’t use any of their products, and I don’t care if you do or not, but this is hitting me kinda hard today. I’m having a fug-feeling day.
Wow. I kind of want to go buy something from Dove just as a matter of principle.
NGL- I cried.
I wish Dove (Unilever) didn’t test their products on animals. I’d support the hell out of them if they didn’t and I would actually buy their stuff. Reblogging because this is still nice.
19% of prime time television characters are non-human while only 17% are women
A Profile of Americans’ Media Use and Political Socialization Effects: television and the Internet’s relationship to social connectedness in the USA ― Daniel German & Caitlin Lally
There are more “non-humans” on TV than women. Talk about unequal gender representation in the media.
Note how the most important facet of this story is not how she swam out and physically saved two people from drowning in a riptide at the risk of her own life, but that during the course of heroic physical activity in an outfit not designed for it, a tit slipped out.
Really? A nipple? A nipple made an appearance when she was dragging her son and a woman twice her size out of strong currents?
WELL HOLY SHIT, STOP THE MOTHER FUCKING PRESS
If a man had done it he probably would have been shirtless and no one would mention his bare nipples. Hell, I bet if his fucking balls had popped out it still wouldn’t even be an issue beaus a man was saving someone’s life, and that’s the most important thing. But, a woman’s nipple was seen and that takes president over the heroic deed.
fuck the media. FUCK THEM
i don’t even like Heidi Klum, but this is some BS. who writes this shit anyway
are you fucking kidding me
IS THERE NO LIMIT TO WHAT THESE FUCKS WILL SEXUALIZE???
I also just love the use of “suffering” and “unfortunate”
I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve lost the top of my bathing suit at the ocean, and I wasn’t even rescuing anyone.
This, of course, is all part of the “we saw your boobs” culture. :/
Genderfuck by Toyota, starring Stav Strashko ;)
Watch the commercial here
Finally androgyns are taken seriously.
WORK IT BABY.
son of a bITCH HES GORGEOUS
Uhhh, can I BE you, please?
I also like the look the model gives the camera like ‘and you were expecting another over-sexualised commercial with a half naked woman for your male viewing pleasure. Mind fuck bitches.’
Somehow, we have popularized the notion that being offended by a joke is wrong, that it’s your own fault for feeling that way and that feeling offended is your personal choice. If you say or even imply that something has offended you, you’ll likely hear something along the lines of ‘learn to take a joke.’ or ‘Get a sense of humor!’ Both of these phrases are dismissive, suggesting that you’re wrong to think critically about comedy and feeling offended is an invalid reaction.
What this attitude ignores is the underlying reason behind peoples’ reactions. Why were you offended by that? What about that joke made you feel uncomfortable? Sometimes people may be ‘overreacting’ to things that would not cause real harm, but in many cases, especially when the joke is racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise targets a marginalized group, there’s a good reason for people to be offended. These jokes, whether they’re intended to be harmful or not, have the effect of normalizing and reinforcing bigotry, prejudices, and stereotypes. What’s worse is that these jokes often feel like a direct assault to the people who are being used as the punchline, like the way rape jokes often trivialize the experiences of victims and make rape out to be a crazy happenstance instead of an atrocity. So, next time you feel like someone isn’t justified for being offender, try to find out why they felt offended in the first place. You might find that what sounded hilarious to you felt more like a punch in the gut to someone else, and it’s hard to laugh when you’ve just had the wind knocked out of you.
Jon Hamm needs to stop dressing like a total slut.
Let’s be real for a second. Wearing a clingy, form-fitting pair of slacks gives the impression that a man is DTBP (Down To Be Photographed). If Jon Hamm didn’t want this type of attention, he shouldn’t have put so much focus on his body by dressing like that. If you didn’t want everyone to stare at your hog, maybe you should have thought of that earlier and donned some more modest apparel. Next time you go out, try not wearing pants like a whore. Maybe consider a loose, flowing kimono or a pair of MC Hammer-style genie pants. They may be less comfortable for you to wear, but they’ll certainly give the rest of us a break from your shameless penis-peddling.
As a famous person/role model, Jon Hamm needs to be conscious of how he presents himself in the public eye. There are thousands of young men across the country who look up to him. Maybe this kind of salacious pants-wearing fashion is fine for an adult, but what about the children? Do we really want America’s boys parading their dongs around like some kind of back-alley Chinatown meat market? I for one do not.
Look, I’m not trying to police Jon Hamm’s body. I’m just looking out for his safety. When the media sees the rippling curve of a man’s body, it can’t help itself. On the street, magazines and websites will inevitably holler out things like: “Do those legs go all the way up to your penis?” and “Can I get a side of fries with that penis?” That’s not out of line. It’s just how a press outlet shows that it’s interested.
Around 5:30 is when Joe starts talking about feminism. He says a lot more than I’d previously heard about, specifically talking about his Mom and Dad, and his Mom’s reaction to objectification and representation of women. It’s really cool.
I haven’t watched this whole thing. (Actually I just kind of gacked it from someone else, and instead of reblogging this person’s creepy fanpoodling and DEFENSE of objectification, I just re-uploaded it. Way to miss the point, fanpoodle. :/ ) So it’s possible he says a lot more cool stuff, but I’m talking about around 4:40-8+ minutes in or so. Really good conversations.
Ryan Gosling on the MPAA’s decision to give Blue Valentine an NC-17 rating over its inclusion of an oral sex scene. (x)
Ladies and Gentlemen, Feminist Ryan Gosling in action. LMLY!!!
I believe this was the beginning of the Ryan Gosling “Hey Girl” meme. :) I’ve never actually seen him in anything, but he’s absolutely right.
And to look at it from another point of view: movies that depict the rape / torture of men DO get an NC17. Like Mysterious Skin, right?
Which tells me this: Hollywood not only finds the torture of women acceptable, and women’s pleasure “dirty,” but it also finds that men’s pleasure is acceptable and palatable, but the torture of men is too horrible for anything other than an NC17.
Am I right about this? Are there any other examples?
ETA: And please don’t anyone try to tell me that the NC17 on Mysterious Skin was because children were involved. There are plenty of movies where little girls are sexualized and abused, and most of those don’t get NC17s either.
It’s interesting (read: infuriating) to me that so many writers and fans think adding strong to the title of female character is anything BUT sexist. Look at what that is saying—we never say “strong male character” because it’s implied. Male characters are mostly treated well by writers—they’re complex and fleshed out and they are usually active participants in the plot.
Dove subversive photoshop ‘app’
Four for you Dove. You go Dove.
*claps* yes. this. epic.
I really love this idea. But, Dove, “real beauty” shouldn’t be tested on animals, either.
‘The ‘Oz’ Books are Full of Kick-Ass Leading Ladies. But Let’s Make a Movie about a Guy Hero Anyways!’
A great article on Jezebel today highlights how Frank L. Baum’s Oz books were full of interesting heroines who saved the day and had adventures, and how this was a direct result of him being a feminist. But predictably, the newest Oz film totally disregards all of that because hey, male heroes need love too!
…As you go through the Oz series, one fact can’t help but jump out at you: The feisty, heroic characters of Oz are all young women. Dorothy returns, again and again, to have adventures in Oz. “Tik-Tok of Oz” features a Dorothy surrogate in Betsy Bobbin (no Toto for Betsy! Her animal companion is a mule named Hank.) Glinda often reappears to do battle. General Jinjur leads an all-female coup against the Scarecrow, and despite its failure, Baum lovingly stops in to see how she’s faring in the common Munchkin life.
But most intriguing and revolutionary of them all is Princess Ozma, who actually makes her first appearance in “The Marvelous Land of Oz” as a young boy named Tip. Tip is the “hero” of the book until it’s revealed an evil witch named Mombi did a magical gender reassignment, and Tip becomes Ozma, restored not only to her rightful throne, but to her own feminine self. It’s a strange and fascinating twist for both Tip and the audience alike, and one with very modern implications.
There are male characters in Oz, of course, but they’re rarely also lead characters. Occasionally one breaks out as a hero, like Ojo the Munchkin boy in “The Patchwork Girl of Oz” or Cap’n Bill and Trot, but they’re one-offs, never to return. The recurring male characters are always faithful and familiar sidekicks like the Wizard, Tin-Man, Tik-Tok, and Jack Pumpkinhead. Alternately, they’re enemies, like the Nome King.
The reason for this is simple: Baum was a feminist. He was an avid supporter of women’s suffrage, and was happily married to the outspoken, intelligent, and energetic Maud Gage Baum, who had gone to Cornell, and sacrificed dreams of degrees to marry him. Their marriage was an unusual one for the time, as Frank happily let her wear the pants, assert her authority, and rule the house.
Baum’s mother-in-law was none other than famous activist and suffragette Matilda Joslyn Gage. She was a frequent visitor at their house, as were many other suffragettes of the time, including Susan B. Anthony. Baum was not only sympathetic to their cause, but active towards it, serving as the secretary for Aberdeen Women’s Suffrage Club, and writing editorials for the “Aberdeen Saturday Pioneer,” urging citizens to vote for women’s suffrage. The revolt of Jinjur in “The Marvelous World of Oz” is an allusion to the women’s movement, and it’s said that the gutsy character of Dorothy was inspired by Matilda, though one can easily see a bit of feisty Maud in her, too.
And now, read this quote from one of the producers of the films:
“And the second reason was — during the years that I spent running Walt Disney Studios — I learned about how hard it was to find a fairy tale with a good strong male protagonist. You’ve got your Sleeping Beauties, your Cinderellas and your Alices. But a fairy tale with a male protagonist is very hard to come by. But with the origin story of the Wizard of Oz, here was a fairy tale story with a natural male protagonist. Which is why I knew that this was an idea for a movie that was genuinely worth pursuing.”
This is so stupid, it made me laugh out loud. First of all, “it’s hard to find a fairy tale with a strong male protagonist”??? Seriously?? When is it EVER hard to find ANY kind of story with a male protagonist? The male protagonist is the *default* character.
Off the top of my head I can name Aladdin, Robin Hood, Peter Pan, Hercules, Simba, Mowgli, Pinocchio, Jim Hawkins from Treasure Planet, Dumbo, Tarzan, Arthur, Quasimodo and Phoebus from the Hunchback of Notre Dame, the boys from the Road to ElDorado and Milo from Atlantis from Disney Films ALONE. I think we can count 101 Dalmatians in there too, as well as the Aristocats. Plus, its characters like the Beast, Eric from the Little Mermaid, and Prince Phillip from Sleeping Beauty who actually defeat the villans of their stories, not the other way around. And pretending as though Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty are STRONG female protagonists is a JOKE. That about says it all really, if that’s what you come up with as a strong female character in a Disney film. Sleeping Beauty is literally unconscious for half her story!
Stories like Jack and the Beanstalk, Peter Rabbit, Humpty Dumpty, The Adventures of Jack Sawyer and Huck Finn, the Boy who Cried Wolf, the Pied Piper and the Little Dutch Boy who Saved Holland are other ‘fairy tales’ featuring men as protagonists. And how can we forget the incredible number of mythical tales featuring male protagonists? Most biblical and ancient tales have male protagonists. Characters like Hercules, Perseus, Paris, David and Goliath, Moses, Sinbad, Samson, Thor, John Smith, Zeus…the list goes on and on. And most Comic Book characters are men as well, including the majority of the Avengers cast, which was a Disney produced movie, AND the Star Wars cast which will be Disney’s newest cash crop. Almost the entire cast of fantasy stories like the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are male, and the sexist undertones of the Chronicles of Narnia ensure that the male characters in those tales are also the ones on top. And what about fantasy stories like The Pirates of the Caribbean?
The fact that the idea was only genuinely worth pursuing with a male protagonist is the kind of blatant yet unrecognized sexism that really gets under my skin. Pretending as though ‘hey everyone! Why don’t we feature a MALE protagonist for a change!?!?’ is somehow REINVENTING THE WHEEL pisses me the HELL off. Males occupy more space than women in almost every single category you can think of. Taking the few stories we have that are based around the heroic feats of women and turning them into yet ANOTHER story of a white, male reluctant hero is not groundbreaking. It’s just another way that men exercise the right they feel they have to all available space. Talk about privilege.
I know which movie I’ll be skipping!
How hard is it to be a female human being in the media? Anne Hathaway is a pretty good measure. She learned everything she could about sex trafficking and prostitution to play Fantine, and knew only too well that modern-day Fantines were probably living within blocks of the Academy Awards. As she said in her acceptance speech, ‘Here’s hoping that someday in the not too distant future the misfortunes of Fantine will only be found in stories and never in real life.’
Did that get coverage? No. Instead, the huge and expensive media beast speculated on her nipples. In a way, that makes Anne’s point. No wonder there are still Fantines, so many in the media think like pimps, traffickers and johns.
Page 1 of 8