Merry Christmas!

I hope you are having a wonderful Christmas! Now get off of the internet and go eat some pie!

Fun clothes for kids

There are still a few days left to buy gifts for Christmas, and I have a couple of great suggestions.
The first is for that baby girl in your life. 

Isn't that a hoot?  I think that women's insecurities about their bodies are totally hilarious.  How awesome is it to jokingly insinuate that even babies have so-called normative discontent about their body size? 

Apparently the NOW is filing complaints against Hooters because they are an adult establishment that markets itself to children.  There is some controversy over whether Hooters is a sexualized environment.  I don't think there is any debate about whether it is trashier than hell. 

In any case, part of the brouhaha was about some t-shirts sold for children that said "Future Hooters Girl."  Sadly, those are no longer available on the website, so your toddler will have to settle for the classic tee above.

As an aside, I was talking to the owner of my daycare last week.  I mentioned that we were going out of town and she was excited to hear that we were going to the state where her daughter attends college.  She said: "You know that Hooters right off of 70, past Mid-Rivers Mall?  My daughter works there!"    Uhhh...
What's the appropriate response to that?

Road trip!

I'll be largely out of touch for the next few days as I'll be traveling.  I certainly won't be going in style quite like these ladies!   I'll post more soon!

"The Princess and the Tomboy"

This is a few weeks old, but it's a dandy.

Okay girls, we all need to choose sides.   Remember, there are only two choices.  Do you love pink?  Does Mommy let you traipse around in high heels? Are you a spoiled, manipulative brat?  Congratulations, you are a Pretty-Pretty Princess!  

Do you like to wear pants?   Are you failing to internalize gender stereotypes?  Are there concerns you  might grow up to be a serial killer? You're a Tomboy!

This strikes me as one step away from declaring these girls are butch and femme.  It also bugs me that the tomboy role is pathologized, and the princess role is described as vain and devious.  Even at age four there is a double-bind. You're damned if you're a princess and damned if you're a tomboy.  It starts early.

As an aside, why do magazines aimed at adults have small children on their covers? They didn't choose to be celebrities, and I think it's creepy as hell that they are followed by paparazzi and that they apparently can sell magazines by being on the cover.  I can't help but imagine some lecherous old man with a collection of these magazines.  Blech.

Pre-Winter Blahs

I hate this time of year.  It is like some sick joke that it is still officially Fall, and it is so damned cold outside.  I'm in the mood for some summery, vintage fun! 

These gorgeous ladies are the winners of some sort of bathing suit contest.  Suck it, Miss America!  This is how a bathing suit competition is done! 

How cute is she?  If Tim Burton was styling a photo shoot on the beach in the 1920s, I think it would look a little something like this.  I love all of her coordinating black and white stripes.  Work it, girl!

 

This is Miss Fritzi Ridgeway in 1924.  I like her attitude.  There might be snow on the ground, but if you have a hankering to rock that swimsuit, you should do it!

Little girls in big girl clothes

Elle Fanning, age 12, at the Venice film festival. 

Several websites commented on this dress as being both fun and age-appropriate. Yes, it would be totally age appropriate if she had on a pair of pants underneath that dress.  The girl is twelve.  Twelve!  Does she really need hooker heels and an up-to-there skirt?  I'm voting no.   

Yes, there are many worse things out there that I could pick to bitch about.  But when this outfit is lauded for being age appropriate, I think something has gone awry.  How about we protect girls instead of sexualizing them, mmmmkay?

Boobies and Breast Health

This is the cover of Wired magazine this month, and some of the images from the inside of the issue.

Earlier today, I was in line at the grocery store.  I always pick the wrong line.  Today, I was behind some forty year-old nerd and his momma.  Instead of loading their groceries onto the belt in a quasi-efficient manner,  they were engrossed in a loud and grammatically questionable argument about the ratio of Snapple to Coca Cola being purchased.  The particular flavor of Snapple seemed to be a point of contention.

In any case, I was stuck staring at the magazines for a while.  The issue of Wired jumped out at me, since  it was practically shouting "Boobs, BOOBS, BOOBS, BOOOOBIES!"   I tried to ignore it, but then it started to shout "Tits, Titties, TITTTAYS!" in the voice of Eric Cartman.  I decided to respect its authoritah, so I picked it up and gave it a quick read.

There are several things I found striking.  One was that this issue was out in plain sight, while the cover of Cosmo was obscured behind one of those magazine cover shields.  The woman on the cover of Cosmo this month even had some clothes on. Huh.  I bet someone at Cosmo lost their job over that.

What was really strange was that the article in Wired was not offensive at all.  It was actually quite interesting.   It described breakthroughs in the use of stem cells to reconstruct breast tissue for women who have had mastectomies  (Breasts and Regenerative Medicine).

So, WTF, Wired?  There is a big mismatch between the content of the article and the imagery accompanying it.   Do we really have to use porny imagery to accompany an article about breakthroughs in breast health?   Can we count on you to run a similar cover if there is a major breakthrough in testicular cancer?

Yeah, I know.  The testicular cancer cover wouldn't sell many copies, and it would probably frighten small children, little old ladies, and pretty much everyone else. 

I have no doubt that the provocative cover caused more people to read a good, largely pro-woman article.  I still don't love it.   Thoughts?