Assignation.

Laverne Cox corrects Gayle King on CBS.

Advertisements

All Hail the Queen? from Bitch Media

These appraisals are perplexing amid a wave of feminist ideology rooted in the idea that women own their bodies. It is the feminism of SlutWalk, the anti-rape movement that proclaims a skimpy skirt does not equal a desire for male attention or sexual availability. Why, then, are cultural critics like Freeman and Petersen convinced that when Beyoncé pops a leather-clad pelvis on stage, it is solely for the benefit of men? Why do others think her acknowledgment of how patriarchy influences our understanding of what’s sexy is mere “lip service”?

Dr. Sarah Jackson, a race and media scholar at Boston’s Northeastern University, says, “The idea that Beyoncé being sexy is only her performing for male viewers assumes that embracing sexuality isn’t also for women.” Jackson adds that the criticism also ignores “the limited choices available to women in the entertainment industry and the limited ways Beyoncé is allowed to express her sexuality, because of her gender and her race.”

One of the best articles about Bey I have ever read. Discusses race, black women, white feminism, media, patriarchy, and girl-on-girl hate. The fact that because Bey wears sexy clothes means she’s not a feminist? Because she’s super hot means she’s not a strong female role model? The fact that she wears a weave means she’s not “black enough” for you?

Through a career that has included crotch-grabbing, nudity, BDSM, Marilyn Monroe fetishizing, and a 1992 book devoted to sex, Madonna has been viewed as a feminist provocateur, pushing the boundaries of acceptable femininity. But Beyoncé’s use of her body is criticized as thoughtless and without value beyond male titillation, providing a modern example of the age-old racist juxtaposition of animalistic black sexuality vs. controlled, intentional, and civilized white sexuality.

READ  THE WHOLE THING I WANT TO QUOTE ALL OF IT. 

American Apparel Advertising

So American Apparel has a fair amount of unisex clothing. Flannels, jackets, etc. all designed to be worn by men and women. But since we all know AA loves to show some skin and objectify some women, the ads are anything but gender-blind.

Gothamist emailed the company asking about criticism surrounding these photos, and a rep responded via email:

“American Apparel is very sensitive to gender and sexual issues, just as we have been to issues like immigration and gay marriage. In this case, the actual product model photo for this unisex item is fully clothed for women, just as it is for men. Unfortunately, some bloggers have confused an artistic photoshoot which accompany the pages with a product shot and a controversy erupted as a result.”

Bloggers don’t get art.

Selling men’s clothes to men, and selling women’s bodies to… ?

Vintage Lego Ad

Not just for boys! Look how happy she is. NO princesses, no pink, no sparkles. Not that there are anything wrong with those things (pink sparkles still play a major roll in my wardrobe), but this beautiful little girl looks perfectly at home with her comfy jeans and sneakers. No need for gendered anything here, just fun kid stuff.