Media: Seduction, Sex and Expectation

Seduction is always more singular and sublime than sex and it commands the higher price. ~Jean Baudrillard

This statement, really hits home for me. If you look at this with an interpersonal relationship in mind the meaning is clear.

From a purely sexual perspective you can say that the sexual tension and build up is often far more tempting, than the sex is fulfilling.

With a long term relationship in mind, you can interpret this to mean that the promises and "potential" of a relationship is rarely realized and both parties are left unfulfilled and feel a bit short changed or unsatisfied by their relationship.

But, the more I look at this quote I can't help to think of society and media. Media is the seduction and life (real life, not reality television) is the sex.

Television, movies, music, fairytales, magazines and various other simulations of life seduce us into thinking that these images projected are the life we should expect. Cosmo, Betsey Johnson, Cinderella and Sex and the City all tell me this is what sex, my wardrobe, my body, my mate, my friends and my life should be.

Life, being like sex, messy, dirty and complicated, can never (or almost never) live up to the seduction of media and the pervasive nature of the "should".

So we all pay the higher price, we all buy into what should be, and are disappointed but what truly is. Some pay the ultimate price, they cannot let go of fantasy and attempt to force the razor edged cookie cutter on their lives and lose that which they truly valued.

I'm not advocating settling for less than you are worth or what you "deserve" (don't forget this is the same phrase ads use to convince to but something you cannot afford and do not need!) but I'm just saying let's all temper our often self righteous claims, remember we too are flawed, and take all aspects of life with a grain of salt.

Men are included too!

I don't want to have the fellas ever think they are not included into the unrealistic body image issue as well. But, let's keep it real, this crap is not foisted upon Men to the same degree it is Women.

Or maybe it is? It doesn't appear to be to me but after all I am a Woman. I invite comments and criticism from all. Let me know, fellas.

More Flippa Fuel for the Fire

I previously blogged about the Ralph Lauren model, Flippa Hamilton, who was photo shopped within an inch of her emaciated life and the backlash Ralph Lauren Inc. received for it.

I have new updates. Apparently, famous model Flippa is pissed b/c RL Inc. fired her "fat" a**! Can you believe it?! Flippa is 5'10, 120lbs! Omg, what a fat cow!

RL Inc. denies the accusation (naturally) and states that Flippa failed to fulfill contractual obligations, one of which being, the requirement to fit into sample sizes 2-4. Please keep in ind that these are "designer sample sizes" meaning that these are not your "normal" size 2-4. Designer sizes are considerably smaller than the sizes you or I would try on at a boutique or department store. The woman is 5'10!!

Here comes the best part... both Flippa and editors of female oriented magazines are issuing a call to arms! This group of "activist" (BS!) are saying that the only way to change the fashions skewed perception of what is beautiful is for the rest of us "normal" women to stop accepting and buying in to the imagery pushed by the fashion industry.

Does anyone else see the irony in this?! If the fashion industry didn't have an unattainable image of beauty half of these stupid magazines would be out of business and the other half would barely eek out an existence. And Flippa, poor sad Flippa...she seemed just fine with this unattainable image when it included her. She was, literally the poster girl for the unattianble image. She knew she was promoting an unreal expectation and helping to lead poor, sad, self-hating 13 year old girls down a hungry, unhealthy and self defeating path as long as she was making money. I find it hard to believe that she was shedding tears all the way to the bank.

Take some F-ing responsibility! There is no doubt in my mind that we all have a part to play in the whole sick, sad game but I'll be damned if I'm going to accept the idea that it is up to me and my friends to shoulder this endeavor while cosmo's editor and super model send out the rally cry!

Empty your fat pockets and eat a carb before you come knockin on my door you implicit heifer.

P.S. Don't forget to leave your crappy crocodile tears at home when you come knockin.

Everyday of our lives we are inundated with behavioral norms, what to say, what to do, how to say it and where it should be done. Even in our times of emotional turbulence and disarray we are told that we must maintain certain decorum, matter of fact these seem to be the times that our performance matters the most, almost a socialization pop quiz, if you will.

So the question remains, who decided what is the "correct" way to argue or have an emotional breakdown? Why is it ok (or at least more acceptable) to calmly "debate" a hot topic, and secretly fantasize about throttling the other person than to be brazenly angry and emotional? I'm not condemning nor condoning either behavior but simply wondering, why is it ok present a false emotional front rather than to be openly upset? Especially in recent culture where "keepin it real" or "real talk" is so heavily touted?

"Anorexia great for girls!" says Ralph Lauren

Ok, so maybe Ralph Lauren doesn't exactly say he endorses eating disorders for young women but his actions definitely do. Here are 2 photos of super model Flippa P. Hamilton. The one above is a recent Ad run by Ralph Lauren for his new diet line, I mean clothing line and the one below is a "candid" of the same model on the runway at a recent show.

You may notice a few differences in the two pictures. The one on the left has been heavily photo shopped to whittle the already tiny waist line of Miss Hamilton. This new ad sparked quite a fire amongst Internet news sites and bloggers. In response to their criticism Ralph Lauren Inc. has threatens litigation against any sites that post the copy written ad without permission. Some sites have relented and removed the photo but the blog site Boing Boing refused and even responded with this:

"Instead of responding to their legal threat by suppressing our criticism of their marketing images, we're gonna mock them," Boing Boing editor Cory Doctorow wrote in a blog post Tuesday. "So, to Ralph Lauren, GreenbergTraurig, and PRL Holdings, Inc: sue and be damned. Copyright law doesn't give you the right to threaten your critics for pointing out the problems with your offerings. You should know better. And every time you threaten to sue us over stuff like this, we will:

a) Reproduce the original criticism, making damned sure that all our readers get a good, long look at it, and;

b) Publish your spurious legal threat along with copious mockery, so that it becomes highly ranked in search engines where other people you threaten can find it and take heart; and

c) Offer nourishing soup and sandwiches to your models."

I had a brillant teacher once say "The opposite of Social Control is Social Change", Boin Boing response to Ralph Lauren is truly social change. Hurray for Boing Boing, hurray for women (and men) and hurray for eating food and not just popcorn, paper and ice chips!!

Link to article:

https://email.mills.edu/owa/redir.aspx?C=3ccdd95f47eb4237be57e3dfeab7c416&URL=http%3a%2f%2fabcnews.go.com%2fTechnology%2fAheadoftheCurve%2f11-photo-editing-flubs-digitally-altered-photo-disasters%2fstory%3fid%3d8780937

Isn't T.V. sensational?!

"Gangland" is a popular program on the History Channel. "Gangland" features a new location, new gang, or a new aspect of gang culture every Thursday night so we can all "experience" the nitty gritty of gang life from the comfort of our living rooms.
Recently "Gangland" did a feature on Oakland, well, actually they did two. I have never seen the show create two episodes featuring one city in this back-to back type manner but they found a way to justify it through the course of the two episodes. The first episodes seemed to feature nothing but "Black" male gangs as all the people interviewed and shown for black males. The second episode showed just Latin male gangs. Apparently, neither women nor white people bang.
As I was watching this with a friend from Sacramento, he said, "Dang, Oakland really gets down, huh? I'm not surprised.". My initial response was, "Yeah...I guess so." as I thought, wow, i really should be more careful. But as the show continued and then the second episode started I continued to see areas that I spent time in and neighborhoods that my friends lived in and I realized just how much propagandist crap was being spewed.
"Gangland" made it seem as if every male of color in Oakland was a gangbanger with an insatiable blood lust. I was furious! Oakland definitely has some gang issues and some real issues with crime in general but this show demonized Oakland so thoroughly that I have friends who have seen the show who are now concerned about their safety in neighborhoods they have lived comfortably in for years!
This is not only ridiculous but also grossly irresponsible. I understand T.V. is a business and they have to make their money but at the same time creators of documentary shows like "Gangland" have a responsibility to present a slightly less skewed version of reality than a fictional show such as "Lost" would. We as viewers, also have a responsibility to ask questions, check sources and think critically about the "information" served to us everyday.
When you see a T.V. show please ask, What is the subcontext of the show? What are the values and ideals they are trying to feed me? In what way are they trying to alter/control my view on the subject matter? Who benefits? Who pays?

An ode to T.V.

Since T.V. was welcomed into the homes of America it has been a cultural force to be reckoned with. Both, programs and commercials have been the harbinger, executor and enforcer of hegemonic culture. This role has created a bit of a love/hate relationship between television and I.

It's like a drug.

The High: Simply inject T.V. via eyes and ears,(no need for the brain you can turn that off!) and T.V. will provide you with the escape you need. You will feel relaxed, happy or at least mostly content and your worries will evaporate in thirty minutes or less. To intensify the effects of T.V. simply apply via tivo or on demand. Please take with large quantities of fat and sugar.

Side effects may include: drowsiness, general lethargy, loss of motivation, depression, weight gain or at least weight issues, change in body image perceptions, insecurity, loss of sense of self, inability to create cognitive thoughts and/or statements, loss of friends, incessant need to purchase previously unnecessary products, total unquestioning indoctrination into hegemonic ideals and complete inability to think for ones self.

Please note that T.V. is highly addictive.

(When using and administering video games, particularly online gaming communities such as "World of Warcraft" please note that all of the above applies and treat with caution.)