Posts Tagged ‘objectification’
There were two examples of healthy female sexuality that come to mind in the Super Bowl commercials. Did you notice them? They depicted agency and the woman in control of the encounter.
First was Amy Poehler’s spot for Best Buy, when she repeatedly hits on her sales guy, asking if “he’ll deliver” and “read 50 Shades of Grey in a sexy voice” to her. She also asks for the “most vibratiest” dryer. She is clearly showing herself as a sexual being, and wanting company.
The other spot was for Taco Bell, when a group of elderly friends hit the town in scenes reminiscent of my twenties. (I can only hope my ending days of adulthood are as much fun as the days I started it with!) We see the women in the group taking off their clothes for a skinny dip, dancing in a club, and making out with men of various ages. I liked the message that women don’t stop seeing themselves as sexy or feeling sexy when the wrinkles and gray appear.
You may not have recognized that as female sexuality because it wasn’t wrapped in shiny black leather and knee high stiletto boots, grinding pelvises and sexualized dance moves. The two examples I shared were women acting as sexual agents in their own space and own time. Tricky, I know.
We’ve become so accustomed to defining female sexuality for what is actually packaged objectification for the male gaze. I have no desire to police or limit how women choose to express their sexuality and empowerment, but can we please aim for something higher than the porniest version possible?
You wouldn’t know it from the advertising, but 50% of last night’s viewers were women and girls. I was one of those women, and I love football. It is a complicated love affair to be sure. I’ve seen some people say that we shouldn’t really be complaining about the commercials because “Football is for men, what do you expect?” With the exception of the wicked funny Amy Poehler or the uniformed Servicewomen in the Jeep ad, the rest of the females depicted in the commercials were mostly: needing to be rescued, arm candy or prizes for men who drive amazing cars, delivering beer, nagging wives, non-verbal wives as car passengers, princesses (the Toyota princess gets a pass), fembots, showgirls, and stripper waitresses.
I have a husband who loves football, and to say that all men who watch football are sexist neanderthals who don’t have a problem with the sexualized and sexist portrayals of women is unfair. Actually, it is sexist.
It was my husband who pointed out to me during the “Fast & Furious” move preview that we saw “five female asses in bikinis and miniskirts before we saw one female face”. He denounced the GoDaddy ads and also found the halftime show to be really distasteful.
The morning after the Super Bowl I posted this: Lots of folks were asking my reaction to the half time show. I answered by asking a question — Would we ever see U2 or the Rolling Stones or Bruce Springteen perform without pants? Does Bono ever slap his ass or suggestively lick his finger and run it over his mostly-exposed breasts with a sultry look for the camera on a tight shot while wearing a leather dominatrix-like ensemble? Do any male performers lay on their backs with a stillettoed leg in the air as they punctuate the refrain on one of their biggest hits?
When we are looking at advertising we often say, “If your product was any good, you wouldn’t need sex to sell it.” I think the same can be said for performers. Beyonce wasn’t just a performer last night, she was a product — she has a reunion album with Destiny’s Child soon to release and she is going on tour. So if we’re going to be spending the night calling out sexism and objectification in the commercials, we have to apply that same lens to halftime.
There is no doubt Beyonce has talent and she brought her A-game last night. The performance was electric, and you could tell she was living and loving every moment. I enjoyed her performance, but definitely felt like I was in a strip club and I’m glad my 7yo daughter was in the bath tub and not watching. Her band and her backup dancers are also talented, but why does the show need to be packaged as a burlesque troupe? Was Beyonce and her all-female band owning it and, or were they performing for the male gaze? When does self-objectification come into the picture? And when it does, can we be strong enough to call it what it really is?
Well, this comment led to an explosion on my PPBB facebook page, with nearly 600 likes, 200 some comments, and 200 some shares. Two follow up posts equally received hundreds of likes, comments and shares. But they weren’t all in favor of what I said. Many were, most were. The ones not in favor of my opinion made points about the performance depicting strength, independence, owning female sexuality, etc. There were the usual comments suggesting prudishness, jealousy, being old and out of touch, and of course the requisite (and racist) Taliban/burqa trope.
I don’t think anyone doubts Beyonce is strong. The woman is fierce and you could literally see her muscles rippling. Her body is thick and athletic and in many ways defies the stick thin Photoshopped version of femininity we see everywhere else. In that way, I think it is great we see so much of Beyonce’s body. The woman has nothing to be ashamed of there.
What I was questioning was if the Super Bowl was the right place for that kind of performance, and is that kind of performance one for “female empowerment” as it was being heralded? If it had been during her world tour (named “The Mrs. Carter Show”), I wouldn’t be writing about it. That is her space and as an artist she should be free to do as she wants. During half time she was a guest of the NFL, and from Pop Warner on up football is an American family tradition. The Super Bowl is the culmination of that tradition, and it would have been great if Beyonce had considered that as she developed the 13 minute program.
This is what I expected of Beyonce, so my kids weren’t watching. I was not expecting the halftime show to be family friendly, it hasn’t been for years. I’m not uptight about what she was wearing, I’m disappointed by it. If I were at a burlesque show, I would have loved it. But I wasn’t. I was playing checkers with my four year old in my family room.
I’m a sex positive person who sees problems with the Pornland our culture has become, and I am a feminist concerned about the women and girls who buy into it. Or worse, defend it.
When we look at the forest through the trees, we need to think about all of the kids and teens whose parents aren’t talking to them about media literacy, sexualization, and objectification. A performance like Beyonce’s is widely celebrated in the media and becomes the benchmark for female success and “empowerment”. The reach of her performance will extend FAR beyond the 12-13 minutes she was on stage. That is what I want to be questioning, especially the next day when I get a half dozen emails from parents asking what to say to their young children who are now trying out Beyonce’s dance moves.
Now I’ve got some incredibly smart women and men in the PPBB Community, one of whom said this, “You know, at first I noticed the all female aspect and thought “how nice, girl power” which, I think, is what you are supposed to think but only on a surface level. How are they getting their power? By “grinding” on each other, by being as sexy as they can possibly be, by performing their sexuality. Bey knows what feminism is and she weaves bits of female power into her performances, videos, and songs but it’s all a backhanded nod to feminism or girl power. She still knows her place (unfortunately) and that’s what we saw last night. Beyonce is such a force of nature she could easily turn the whole industry on it’s head by refusing to be part of the “male gaze” but I don’t believe she will.” (Thank you, Natalie B!)
As the conversation went back and forth all day and into the night, I wondered if I had missed something when I first watched the performance. Maybe with my kids nearby I was distracted and I missed some context that would change how I viewed it. So I watched it again. Nope, the only thing I had missed the first time around was the “wardrobe malfunction” that exposed a nipple and some vulva.
This puts me back at my original question of if this was really necessary (not whether or not she has the right to do it) for this time and venue, especially by someone who touts herself as a role model for girls?
My problem is a question of *why* a woman as talented a singer, dancer and all-round performer as Beyonce might feel as though she has to sex things up to be successful. She even gives her performing self a different name. Although she portrays this as a way for overcoming stage fright, she has made it clear again and again, that “Sasha Fierce” is not her. There’s part of me that wonders whether or not she would feel the need to make the distinction if she were able to perform, dance and sing without the massive amount of sex appeal imbued in that character.
Actresses also play different roles, but they try to make the roles their own and attempt to inhabit their characters. They don’t feel need to make sure the audience knows that who they are playing is not them. Quite the opposite. Beyonce could easily be playing a role, as many singers probably do, without stressing the point. She does though, and furthermore, she says the character, the very sexy and sexual character, makes her feel powerful, fearless.
That is women being taught that their power lies in what is, essentially, objectification. A woman even as talented as Beyonce feels that she must be sexual in order to be powerful, valued and successful, yet does not like the character and feels, when in that persona, that she isn’t even aware of her body – that her body is literally not her own.
“I created my stage persona to protect myself, so that when I go home, I don’t have to think about what it is I do. Sasha isn’t me.” Beyonce, Parade Magazine, December 2006
“I wouldn’t like Sasha if I met her offstage.” Beyonce, Parade Magazine, December 2006
“I have someone else that takes over when it’s time for me to work and when I’m on stage, this alter ego that I’ve created that kind of protects me and who I really am.” Beyonce Press Statement, October 2008
-facebook comment from PPBB Community Member Jen Prowse
So my question to Beyonce would be what about the girls who look up to you, who you encourage to look up to you, who are not able to make such easy distinctions? Because they do answer for the sexualized climate you contribute to. They don’t have the money or celebrity to walk away or hide from it. You may not have to think about it, but they sure do.
But it is not just about children. It is about how this affects all of us, long after the halftime show is over. When the most pornified version of female sexuality becomes the benchmark for “female empowerment”, we’ve got problems. Big. Problems. Female sexuality should not belong to the male gaze. We need to take the responsibility to make sure it belongs to us.
I don’t mind sexy, in the right time and place. I mind “all sex all the time”, and having it defined by men. Beyonce’s performance was hot. It wasn’t appropriate for the Super Bowl. And it wasn’t empowering for me.
I need to make a very important clarification in regards to the child beauty pageant post about “Toddlers & Tiaras”.
When we talk about sexualization, our focus should and must remain on the emotional, social, sexual, and physical health of our daughters.
Our daughters are the center of this discussion, and we need to keep our focus on their intrinsic value and natural born right to a childhood. Our daughters (and sons) are the focus of this discussion.
Sexualization of childhood isn’t only about pedophiles.
But it has EVERYTHING to do with our kids’ healthy emotional development around gender, sexuality, body image, beauty, and self esteem.
THE DISTINCTION IS AN IMPORTANT ONE.
(For those who want a crash course about the process of sexualization, what the four criteria are, and how it harms our children, go here.)
I saw numerous comments here and around the web in response to my post that questioned the validity of the show based on if sexual predators would see these girls. Whether or not that happens is certainly of some importance, but the emotional and physical health of these girls is the primary concern. Sexualization slides the bar of taboo around children and sex, but if the conversation moves to “pedophiles might see them” and “this feeds pedophilia”, we unintentionally objectify the VERY girls we are trying to protect. We take away our girls’ agency when we shift focus off of them and onto the possibility of an outside party’s actions. Our primary concern is what is happening to the minds and bodies of these girls in the present, what might or might not happen in the future is secondary.
I absolutely care about the victims of child sexual abuse, and with rational caution am wary of sexual predators, but that is a post for another day.
Child beauty pageants may be atrocious and offensive, but they are not child pornography. They do not fall under the legal definition, and to describe them as such undermines the potency and heinousness of real child pornography and the victims it affects. Whether or not the actions of some of these parents are cases of child abuse would vary from state to state and the statutes that govern that jurisdiction. Both claims need to carry a heavy weight of social condemnation with them, and should not be tossed around lightly.
I want to thank everyone who left comments on the blog yesterday, in social media circles where this post was widely shared, and in emails I received. Clearly the topic of children, specifically girls, participating in beauty pageants is a hot button issue. The protection of our daughters’ right to a girlhood is a passionate issue for me, and I am touched that there are many, many people out there who are equally caring. The post and call to action came from a need for our society to curb the epidemic of the highly sexualized media and marketplace that surround and harm our children.
I love Candy Corn, that festive white – orange – yellow buttery honey candy that lets us know autumn and Halloween are here. I think what I enjoy most about Candy Corn, is that it never tries to be something it is not. The company that makes Candy Corn knows enough to put the stuff with the black stripe, and those pumpkins, in an entirely separate bag, entirely separate wrapper. You know, so as not to confuse the original Candy Corn lover.
So imagine my surprise last week, while munching a few Candy Corn, I nearly choke when someone sends me a link of a popular tv star (whose character is a high school student on FOX’s “Glee”) in sexually provocative poses that are both a little bit porny and a lot bit distasteful. These weren’t photos leaked through an unfortunate social media posting. They were taken by a professional photographer in order to sell a popular national men’s magazine. And there is very little change to the wrapper.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not falling from my chair in shock that there are desperate Hollywood starlets ready and willing to take it off, bare it, and spread it on a few glossy pages of a men’s mag so that we remember their name for one more month. The only thing is that the women who posed in these shots aren’t desperate. They are on a hit show, incredibly talented, and seemingly at the top of their game.
These adult actors were still in character during the shoot that takes place in what looks like a school (cheerleader, letter jacket wearing drummer), and otherwise wearing childish items like lacy anklet socks and pigtails…while bending over suggestively or spreading legs wide on a bench with an “Oopsie!” look on their faces.
My problem is that this whole ‘dirty school girl’ shoot didn’t change enough between the high school tv characters and the adult actors to qualify as changing the wrapper. Certainly not for that tween fan who a few months from now will Google photos of their favorite diva singer from Glee and see crotch shots and objectification in a way that leaves the female subject childish and vapid. (That’s where the sexualization comes in, fellas.) I’ve read statements from three of the cast members of the show saying things like, “I don’t know how they got me to do half of what I did” and “There are bigger problems in the world, like hunger and the losing Dallas Cowboys” and finally “well I’m sorry if your 8 year old is holding a copy of GQ”.
What I’m sorry about is that none of the Glee producers, or the actors’ agents, or the actors themselves, gave any thought to the outcome these photos would have. The photographer that was hired is Terry Richardson, Uncle Terry as he is known, infamous for being a skeevy and allegedly sexually assaulting many of his subjects. When you hire a guy whose motto is “Rock out with your cock out”, you know what you’re getting yourself into. So at some point, when Uncle Terry says, “Good, girls, now you bend over and you jump up and down in your bra and panties and lacy ankelts…” maybe one of the two actresses, would look at the other and say, “You know, we don’t want to be type-cast as high school students for the rest of our careers, but maybe doing this isn’t taking us in the right direction either.”
And when you are now a famous tv star with a fan base of millions of teens and tweens, you need to give some responsibility to your agency and say, you know, this doesn’t represent me or my character. Let’s move this to the beach or shoot us on the street or at a bar so that all those kids who made me famous know that this is me the adult, not me as their idol and favorite on a show they watch religiously every Tuesday night.
We do have bigger problems than the losing streak of an NFL team, we have the sexualization of youth and the objectification of women going on with such complacency in the media it is as if their eyes are wide shut.
If you are going to sell Candy Corn, I’ll buy. If you are going to then try to sell me Candy Corn packaged in porn industry costuming being ass palmed by a fully dressed male while coyly playing with a bright red lollipop, I’ll tell you I’m changing the channel and not buying the insincere and apathetic apologies trying to act as damage control.