Re: Women Ditch Push-Up Bras, Big Implants for Natural Cleavage Trend
I feel like this article is a little behind. Kate Hudson has been trotting ‘round her small boobs (and I’ve been jealous of them) since 2000, during promotion for Almost Famous. I think ever since the heroine chic thing, lanky women with small boobs have been a thing, and I know I’ve wanted a boob reduction ever since I was 20. Most guys I’ve talked to about this don’t like huge boobs (oddly, I can’t think of any women I’ve talked to about it), but that probably says more about my preference of guy. The “manic pixie dream girl” character is always played by distinctly un-curvy women (i.e. Kirsten Dunst, Jean Seberg, Audrey Hepburn, Zooey Dechanel) and I think that has affected what our generation finds to be attractive more than Pamela Anderson or plastic surgeons, I mean come on. I would actually argue that the trend towards small boobs has been there for a while. And if there was an option for the tear-shaped implants 10 years ago, I’m sure people would have been into it back then too.
As a person with an unruly chest, I often feel like I’m on the outside looking in. Clothes are not generally designed for big boobs, nor are bras for that matter. People with big boobs are basically given the message that they don’t belong every time they go shopping. What would actually be radical is if there were a movement for people with big boobs! I want Hollywood to accept more celebrities like Christina Hendricks and that girl from 2 Broke Girls who have big boobs, and I want to see more big boobs on the red carpet and in chic clothing because let me tell you, big boobs are not chic. I’m always trying to find pictures of big chested women to see what they wear so I can get ideas, and it seems like even if they have the money to hire stylists, there are actually no clothes except for old ass granny cut dresses with corsets available to them. It’s utter bullshit. Basically, I’m incensed by the assertion that this “small boob movement” is a new thing because I have been dealing with it forever and I’m sick of it.
I love this. It is undeniable that Hollywood producers tend only to greenlight projects with extremely narrow representations of men: a violent sexed up “vigilante” often foiled by a sexless and socially awkward nerd. This dynamic is especially applicable to the Apatow films, but certainly not limited to them. These characterizations define the value of men, in large part, by how much sex they have with different women, creating a competitive worldview for men where women exist primarily to display their power or status. While we are just starting to address the problem of misogyny in popular culture, as defined by “rape culture,” it is imperative that we address the issue of guy on guy hate, which is actually the root of the problem.
This is where I believe that people who deny media influence are mistaken. The judgement that men face from one another and the pressure they put on each other to climb this social hierarchy through sex is widely accepted in popular media, as is the bashing that comes from not being successful in doing so. The shame that men direct toward each other for not participating in or failing at sexual competition is as damaging to men as it is to women, and yet we see this rhetoric everywhere. We see young actresses and singers as well as hollywood films (i.e. Taylor Swift, Mean Girls, The Other Woman) embracing the concept of “girl love,” and rejecting “slut shaming,” but why is Hollywood so slow to embrace “guy love?” The idea that a film marketed towards men would focus on something other than a quest for sex, or men committing violence upon one another is a completely radical idea. Until we address the pressure that men put upon one another to derive value from and be successful in these areas, it doesn’t matter how much women love each other or how many examples of misogyny we annotate with #YesAllWomen. We cannot fully treat the problem of misogyny until we start changing how men see themselves and furthermore, how they treat each other.
Re: Seth Rogen Learns that Women Can be Funny
“That actually became the most exciting idea of the movie to us — that we could portray a couple where the wife is just as fun loving and irresponsible as the guy, and where they got along really well. In a comedy, that is almost nonexistent”
Almost tickled by the naivety of this quote from an interview Seth Rogen did with Studio 360.
Yes, Seth Rogen, in every single one of your horrendous films, women are portrayed as either dumb sluts or shrews. And while I can’t seem to escape the interminable man-child prison that is your career, no, your myopic, high school brand of comedy is not all of comedy (although it probably is the dumbest). Shockingly, comedians have been writing interesting and dynamic characters for women for a really long time, including child molester Woody Allen, maybe you’ve heard of him? Nevertheless, thank you for finally joining us in the 21st century, where women are no longer solely cast in films to exaggerate the helpless idiocy of their male counterparts in a flaccid attempt to earn a chuckle from misogynistic bros who are too high to read a book.