Advertisement
I saw a young girl the other day wearing a pair of pants with the words PINK across her buttocks. As feminists, what do you think is going on here? I am curious as to how this can be seen as empowering or anything other than degrading and exploitive. Your opinions and comments will be greatly appreciated.
j
j
posted by:
|
|
Unsubscribed |
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Tue, March 11, 2008 - 8:38 AMI have absolutely no idea why having words on someone's butt would in any way impact their self-respect or a decline in feminism. And unless the word was "whore" I can't see how it would be degrading. College students wear sweat pants with letters on across the butt all the time: sororities, Juicy Couture, silly words.
I think this is just a case of you being out of touch with youth culture. :) for example, there's a singer named Pink and it may have been her clothing line. Or maybe the girl was in a group of some kind called Pink. Or maybe she just liked the color pink. This seems totally harmless and I don't see cause for alarm.
Not every single item of clothing we wear at every single moment is supposed to be empowering or charged with meaning. Sometimes clothing is just clothing. And that's coming from someone who designs clothing. ;) -
-
Unsu...
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Tue, March 11, 2008 - 9:09 AMwell, thank you for your reply, but as for your assumption, I am not out of touch nor do I particularly think that this means anything. I am taking a feminist philosophy class, and this is an assignment. I dont particualry think that such words mean anything, either, but the teacher, a feminist, took exception, and asked for an essay on the topic. SO, Thank you for your input. -
-
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Tue, March 11, 2008 - 10:25 AMsorry if I misunderstood. Your original post said you had seen the pants and found them anti-feminist, degrading, exploitive. From the tone of anger and confusion that was conveyed I assumed that perhaps you hadn't seen this trend before so you were viewing it without a prior context. The same way that many middle-aged moms had never heard of Juicy Couture when it started so they found it shocking that kids were wearing the word "juicy" on their butt or back. ;) I mean, while the word was of course supposed to have a double meaning in that case it was mostly prudishness and madonna/whore judgment that caused them to find it wrong.
I honestly don't see a problem with the word "pink" nor with writing on one's butt. I think it's the viewer's own issues that project a negative meaning on something like that. Women's bodies are not inherently dirty. -
-
Unsu...
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Tue, March 11, 2008 - 10:32 AMI am sorry, actually, didnt mean to come across as a butthead, sometimes you write things in your head one way, and they read other. My bad. The prof. was offended, but IMHO, one can be offended anytime you want to if you look for offense hard enough. Like you said, Pink is not derogatory, but a fashion statement. I would even wonder, personally, if SLUT were derogatory if one wanted to be known in that context. I guess I was really just fishing for input so I could find some way to respond. -
-
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Tue, March 11, 2008 - 2:04 PM*L* no worries, I don't think I was wording things in the right way either. :)
I agree that something like SLUT would be questionable as to whether it really were derogatory. Personally, I'm not a fan of the word. I know some adopt it the way lesbians have adopted the word dyke, but I really don't feel the whole slut or ethical slut thing elevates anyone. It's still using a judgmental word and since there is no male equivalent for slut, it still buys into the idea that females should be judged separately for having the same sexual actions. I know some like to wear shirts that say whore or slut to push buttons. But in ordinary context (meaning not a performance or costume) it doesn't in any way garner my respect for them, any more than those who wear shirts that say princess or brat. But as I said, that's my opinion. :)
I do think that one's clothing choices can strike a feminist or political cord. I think it's important to realize the connotations behind the item one is wearing. So for example a "pimp daddy" shirt might seem funny or culturally acceptable I never understood why more people don't recognize that term for what it really is. We've come to use it so casually it's like we've forgotten it means a man who sells women for sexual acts, profitting from their labor so to speak, usually under the threat of violence or coercion of drugs. I mean, is that really what a person wants to say about him/herself?
Ditto for the Playboy bunny logo, or the Porn Star shirts, or camo printed clothing. These are all things with significant cultural meaning that have become so casually slipped into our pop culture. I mean, if those are things you actually want to say about yourself or you're ok with those concepts, then good for you. but I think most people just ignornantly throw them on without paying attention to the significance and image they're conveying.
Clothing can get very psychologically and socially complex. For exampe, the styles of the 50s are friggin gorgeous, but they're also loaded with associations from a time of ugly oppression, prejudice and freakishly stifling gender roles. That doesn't mean a person wearing them necessarily wishes to harken back to that time and those values, but if worn in a certain way or in certain context they can be imbued with those associations. However, I don't feel that clothing that calls attention to the body (such as words printed across a butt or bust) are inherently offensive or derogatory. I think it's partly a context issue and partly a time and place thing.
I'm sure you'll get some more views from others. :) Did your prof say why she/he was offended? That might be a point to respond to.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Tue, March 11, 2008 - 4:22 PMwow. That is great, I love your opinion. She was in fact offended, and is horrified by the fact that women still wear high-heels and dress differently than men. She is a self described "radical" and admits that her views tend towards the extreme, aborting male babies, stuff like that, but I do find her engaging none-the-less. I did tell her that I thought of women's sexuality as a powerful thing, to which she disagreed. Thank you so much for your input.
j -
-
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Wed, March 12, 2008 - 8:37 AMah, that is pretty extreme. :) post your essay when you're done, it should be an interesting read. -
-
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Wed, March 12, 2008 - 10:38 AMthis is a great discussion...
i DO believe that women's sexuality is extremely powerful. women get to play godess when it comes to sex and reproduction. sex completely seems to revolve around women's bodies, and controlling women's bodies --at the expense of women as human beings. i think this relates to why sexual pleasure for women is the more taboo topic, because both women and men want to control other people's sexualities for their own ends. if a woman enjoys sex, and is in control of her own body and sexuality then she has the final word on who has access to her body, who she reproduces with and when and how.
this is a quite a force (of nature) to contend with, and strikes fear into the hearts of housewives (repressed prudes) and republicans/religious fanatics (repressed perverts) everywhere. i think this desire to control women's sexuality is due to a longing to blame their own lack of control over their own sexual urges on someone else, namely women, but especially sexually liberated women (becuase as a culture we seem to categorize and essentialize everyone based on a few examples).
as for the Pink on the butt, that is a Victoria's Secret brand of basically pajamas. who cares? i think its just a dumb advertisement. i find almost all advertising these days offensive becuase its insidiously everywhere. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Wed, March 12, 2008 - 10:25 PMAll sexuality is powerful...because that's what the evolution of homo sapiens has wrought over geologic time. If it weren't powerful then, frankly, you'd be unlikely to be here reading this. By selection for the most prolific humans, sexual selection has assured us that the current population of human beings will go to much trouble to copulate...no matter what the winds of social sexual faddism may be telling our forebrains to worry (or not) about.
It seems to me that just skimming over the power dynamics involved in sexual relations does not do anyone any good at all. There are certain facts that might be agreed upon and applied to sexual power dynamics. Namely,
1. Up till now successful populations of human beings have not typically shunned copulating.
2. In a coupling, there are two people (usually) directly involved.
3. That social mores have been designed to give stability...or, perhaps, predictability?
4. That social mores are not necessarily predicated on a benefit to one gender or the other.
5. That inequality is based on perceived individual benefits, one partner receiving the shorter end of the stick.
6. Those goals are generally predicated on individual preference.
7. Predictability has a public and a private face.
8. And what predictability is generally, again, dependent on individual preference.
9. Convenience in predictability leads individuals to make assumptions about gender roles.
10. Who has received the shorter end of the stick is not always apparent.
11. Gender chauvinism leads one to believe that one's own gender is better than another. This arises because it enables individuals to function as if they are somehow superior to the other gender. It places a power value on gender relations.
12. People of either gender are susceptible to gender chauvinism.
But wouldn't it be better to put these into a coherent treatise...or find some treatise and apply these points to them and thus derive one's views in a rational manner? This is the problem, see, where each individual assumes they've been wronged because of their gender...because other individuals they interact with are playing fast and loose with "predictability".
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Thu, March 13, 2008 - 8:44 AM> "as for the Pink on the butt, that is a Victoria's Secret brand of basically pajamas."
ah since I avoid VS like the plague that it is, I had not yet experienced that cringe worthy example. ;) there's just way too much pink saturation and brigh colors in that store, it's seizure inducing.
" i think its just a dumb advertisement. i find almost all advertising these days offensive becuase its insidiously everywhere."
I agree. if anything, I think those PInk pants are a reason to be offended at a person's willingness to pay to wear a walking advertisement, at overpriced badly made clothing and at the stupid trend of wearing pajamas in public. ;) but on a purely feminist platform, they're pretty innocuous. ;)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Fri, April 11, 2008 - 8:43 PMActually the post did NOT say they found them anti-feminist, degrading, exploitive. Read it again. =P
-
-
-
-
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Sun, April 27, 2008 - 12:00 AMI think someone is trying to say: "I shop at Victoria's Secret, therefore my underwear is cool and trendy (and perhaps a bit slutty), and I will advertise that fact on my butt, because that's where all the boys will be a-lookin."
As for Victoria's Secret's PINK line, and the possibility of it (or any other products from that company) being anything other than degrading and exploitive... HAHAHA!! Fat chance. That company preys on young women who feel that they need to be "sexy" to be worth something.
Any store that charges fifty bucks for a bra is NOT ok in my book.
-
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Sun, April 27, 2008 - 3:39 AMPink ain't no prison no more!
That's what it says to me.
I am, quite honestly thrilled to see the reclamation of the color pink... as a symbol of female (breast) health, and as code for "I'll wear what I damn well please and don't you dare judge me for it.
I am sure many of the young women that wear P-I-N-K across their butts have no idea what this word would mean to sixties and seventies styled feminists.... But I still like the fact that they are bold enough to wear it.
And, I toast the advertising mogul at Victoria's Secret for thinking this one up. I would love to meet the person responsible for the "P-I-N -K line" to see what went through her (his) head???
Amma -
-
Re: PINK on the Butt????
Sun, April 27, 2008 - 9:58 AMamma... ... i must admit that as much as i hate logo worship and advertising that the "pink" line at victoria's secret is a secret and guilty pleasure of mine.
this line is sporty and casual, and uses bold colors (bright blues and greens) and the panties are the "boy brief" style that i like and feel comfy in. plus a lot if it has stripes (which as a sixties style worshipper i friggin adore--think austin powers pants with longitudinal striping yay). and there's a decent amount of the pink-label stuff that doesn't flaunt the logo across the ass (which i find ugly and insipid, personally, but whatever floats your boat as they say).
without going too too off topic, i feel like as a woman i should be able to like what i like without having to feel guilty about it. ;)
-
