In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Hot sexy law school deans are waiting for you…

Creepy indeed. A law gossip blog (who knew?) is soliciting nominations for the sexiest female law school dean. Because, you know, when you’ve clerked for the Supreme Court, graduated at the top of your class, been published dozens of times over, and worked your ass off to succeed in what remains a remarkably male-dominated (and remarkably white) field, it’s really important to make sure that you know your place as a pretty thing to be admired. Or torn apart, as is inevitable in these kinds of contests.

Some of the nominations seem tongue-in-cheek and genuinely laudatory of the nominee’s accomplishments, using “sexy” in a Real Hot 100 kind of way. Others, though, aren’t quite so charming:

“I apologize in advance for ruining your contest. After you put up this nominee, the vote won’t even be close. She will lead the pack right out of the gate, and she will continue to lead until the cows come home.”

“So I’m sorry. But I couldn’t sit on the sidelines and watch someone other than Asha Rangappa win the title of Hottest Law School Dean in the United States. It would be a miscarriage of justice.”

“Asha is nothing short of stunning — an overused word, kind of like ‘brilliant’ in the pages of ATL and UTR — but so, so true. She could be a model. When I attended Yale Law School with her (she was class of 2000), she was the best-looking woman in the entire school. Not just her year, but the whole damn place. Asha Rangappa, without question!”

“I write to nominate Asha Rangappa in your beautiful law school dean contest. First, she’s a genius: Princeton, Yale Law, a Fulbright, a First Circuit clerk. Second, she’s totally badass: from 2002 to 2005, she worked in the FBI as a Special Agent, focusing on counterintelligence investigations in New York City. How cool is that?”

“Third, and most importantly, Asha is simply gorgeous. There hasn’t been this beautiful a woman in federal law enforcement since Jennifer Lopez pretended to be a U.S. US Marshal in ‘Out of Sight.’ This South Asian beauty — with her milk-chocolate skin, lively eyes, Julia Roberts smile, and reddish black tresses — will demolish the rest of your field.”

And the comments are… special. A nice mix of racism, sexism and male entitlement (“She’s smart (for a woman),” “None of these chicks are hot enough for my standards, which are the universal rules of who is and is not attractive,” and “Indian people smell like curry” just about sum it up). Everything we all love about beauty contests, and none of that “scholarship pageant” silliness. Rock on, David Lat — you’re a true rebel.

via.

Things I Have Learned This Week

Body hair is the root of all feminism. ‘Strue! If you wax, you pull it out by the roots, and therefore you’re no longer a feminist and you have to turn in your Feminist Membership Card. Okay, maybe you can get it back if you stop waxing and let it grow back and you’re reallyreallyreally sorry about it and promise to wear only flannel shirts and workboots from now on. You can even watch Project Runway and work in an industry that supports the patriarchy, but if you leave your body hair alone — especially the hair on your hoohah — you can keep your card. In fact, you can even join the Feminist Police and raid those Korean nail salons to check for women getting Brazilian waxes and pedicures while in possession of a Feminist Membership Card.

And shaving’s not going to save your ass, sister — you may think you’re getting away with something by leaving the roots in place and removing the visible parts of the hair, but the Feminist Police are onto you. Expect random pit-checks, and you better show some hairy legs when they come around.

Fat, Fashion, and Scapegoating

Couple of items came to my attention regarding fat women being presented as sexy and the reactions thereto.

First up: Trouble at the Lusty Lady, the country’s only unionized strip club, over an email from a male worker (who wants to see the union gone now that the club is a co-op owned by the union members) relaying complaints he allegedly heard from customers regarding a night at the Lusty Lady featuring “BBW”* performers:

Like a lot of San Francisco businesses, the Lusty Lady prides itself on diversity, offering up dancers in a variety of sizes, shapes, ethnicities, attitudes and tattoos.

But like a lot of North Beach clubs, business at the Lusty — while steady — isn’t what it was a few years back during the dot-com years, so every customer and dollar counts.

That’s why it was such a big deal in July, when someone booked an entire night of “BBW” entertainment — big, beautiful women — and the clientele reacted by walking out.

The counterman wrote up the customers’ objections — “I came for fantasies, not nightmares” being one of the more printable ones — and sent them off in what he thought was a confidential e-mail to the club’s board of directors.

However, one board member, who worked as a Lusty dancer, took offense and plastered a printout of the e-mail on the dressing room mirror for all the entertainers to see.

Talk about an ugly situation.

Now, from this account, it sounds like “the clientele” walked out en masse. Because, my God! Who would want to see fat women dancing naked?

Read More…Read More…

Made for me

It’s everything I love in life (Mariah, Elliot and Olivia), and I thought I’d share. Plus, Lauren dared me.

Moving the Goalposts

Jennifer Ouellette at 3 Quarks Daily has a must read post on the moving target of sizes in women’s clothes. While the couture industry is scaling down sizes so that zero is the new four, and sizes less than zero are being created, the mass-market apparel industry is, thankfully, beginning to realize that they’re in the business of selling clothing to people with actual bodies — and only a very small number of women’s actual bodies, regardless of size, fit the industry’s hourglass standard.

The post is too chock-full of great stuff to excerpt here, so hie thee over to 3 Quarks Daily and read the whole thing.

Hot Preggo Chicks Sell You Beer

pregnant

via Feministing, I ran across these images of sexy pregnant women being used in advertising — for cars and non-acoholic beer. Of course, these pregnant women are still skinny everywhere but their tummies, and apparently have no stretchmarks or swollen ankles or thick thighs or rounded arms (or even side fat!). Because advertising, you know, is so realistic.

Now, I’m all for breaking down stereotypes about pregnant women, and emphasizing the fact that the pregnant body is not deviant, and does not have to be hidden. I think Demi Moore’s Vanity Fair cover back in the mid-90s was fabulous, and that the backlash against it (vendors covered the magazine with brown paper bags and conservatives flipped out about the indecency of it all) sparked important conversations about women’s lives, and our abilities to be mothers and still be sexy (how do you think Demi got pregnant in the first place? Ladies’ bridge night?). The pregnant body isn’t digusting or shameful. But that said, I don’t think that taking women who are already conventionally beautiful and showing images of them while pregnant is particularly progressive, especially when those images follow the same tired rules as other hot-skinny-sexy-women-as-hood-ornaments ads.

I also worry about how this will impact perceptions of pregnancy. Women are already expected to strive for an unreachable beauty ideal throughout most of our lives; we’re supposed to drop the baby fat within a few months of giving birth; now we’re supposed to be skinny sex objects even when we’re pregnant?

What Was That About Gluttony, Again?

You know the drill. Someone’s fat, and someone else comes to the conclusion that the fat person got that way by stuffing his or her face with cheesecake or donuts or what have you.

Not so fast.

News Flash: Soda Is Fattening

Add a report from the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition to the growing list of evidence that sugary soft drinks are adding pounds to kids. The report, a meta-analysis of others’ scientific research, says one extra can of soda a day can translate into 15 pounds a year. The report concludes: “Although more research is needed, sufficient evidence exists for public health strategies to discourage consumption of sugary drinks as part of a healthy lifestyle.”

And, as certain as night follows day, the sugar industry begs to differ.

Doesn’t take much to get fat if one spreads the calories out. There are only about 140 calories in a can of sugared soda, and most people can down one or two without giving a thought to the calories, and without any sensation of satiety.

Read More…Read More…

Battling Anorexia Through Fashion Week

Fashion Week in New York has spawned all kinds of conversations about models, thinness and anorexia — including this op/ed in the New York Times urging the fashion industry to promote healthier bodies. The paper makes the important point that the thinness seen in many models isn’t natural, and that these women are being pushed to dangerous extremes:

If the industry needed a wake-up call, it got one last month, when Luisel Ramos, an Uruguayan model who had been advised to lose weight, died of heart failure after taking her turn on the catwalk. She reportedly had gone days without eating, and for months consumed only lettuce and diet soda.

I don’t think anyone expects industry standards to shift immediately. But Madrid has given us some hope, although I’m not sure they go far enough — as Aimee Liu points out in the LA Times, these women need help, not rebuke. While the best-of-the-best fashion models are making a lot of money, the majority of runway models are relying on their bodies for simple survival, and generally aren’t going to be able to check themselves into a treatment center when doing so is expensive and may damage their career. There must be incentives for models to strive to reach healthier weights, and there must be structures in place to help them with disordered eating.

These structures must also be put in place for “regular” women with eating disorders. The vast majority of anorexics and bulimics are not models; they certainly deserve access to treatment as well. But too often, treatment is expensive, inaccessible, not covered by insurance, or only partially covered.

Conversations around this topic are important, but they can be frustrating, as they often devolve into judgmentalism about which bodies are beautiful and shaming women who don’t fit a particular standard — who aren’t skinny enough, or who are too skinny, or who risk their health in order to keep their jobs. Critiquing the systems and social expectations that drive women to this behavior is fine (and when talking about eating disorders, that should obviously also be balanced with discussing genetics and psychological issues). So to preempt any of that, I’ll ask that in the comments section, we focus our discussion on the broader issues, without making comments about our personal opinions about the physical attractiveness of runway models, or skinny women, or fat women, or our ideas of what anorexic women look like.

All that said, I’m at least glad that a paper like the New York Times is covering this issue, and deeming it important enough to editorialize.