Is the 'Love' in Daisy of Love the same?

I have yet to watch VH1's new 'reality' extravaganza Daisy of Love which features Rock of Love contestant Daisy in her search to find a new boyfriend. Before the show aired, I had seen several trailers which I found particularly problematic when compared to the VH1 reality shows featuring men:

VH1 TV Shows | Music Videos | Celebrity Photos | News & Gossip

Daisy's trailer features her virtually begging. She comments in several of them that she "needs a boyfriend." The network develops the idea that women are NEED relationships. They are emotionally unstable and will do anything for someone to love them. Rock of Love and For the Love of Ray J, two shows that recently ended, both feature very different depictions of the stars. It is particularly interesting to compare Daisy's appearance with the show that she first appeared on:

Even though Daisy is the person choosing her mate, her depiction is completely different than that of Michaels. He is not shown as needy or whiney. Instead, he, like Ray J in For the Love of Ray J, is calm and collected, looking to have fun and meeting cool people not on a quest for a soulmate to complete them. Contestants go to extreme lengths to 'prove their love,' but I'm curious about why this journey is shown different for Daisy.

Bromance

I posted a blog entry about a week ago discussing the homophobia prevalent in hip hop music based largely on the hypersexual, hypermaculine conception of black men. But I started thinking lately about the conception of white masculinity after I saw this clip that aired on the Jimmy Kimmel Show:



Whether in Judd Apatow comedies, MTV reality shows, or late night television, there has been a lot of the ironic use of 'homoerotic' situations to create humor. Close male friendships have been dubbed bromances and buddy comedies focus on the intimacy of the friendship before making sure to note that it is a completely platonic relationship.

The most important question seems to be, why is it funny? Is it a comment on a shift in society that signals an end to the conception of malehood as emotionless? Or is it just a gentler form of homophobia.

The actors in this video aren't literally saying "no homo" the way many mainstream rappers are doing, but it seems their actions are doing it for them. While it is important to show young men that close relationships between men should not be stigmatized, it seems that they are embracing and appropriating the idea in an effort to distance themselves from homosexuality. Men do not behave this way 'normally.' Rather than commenting that same sex relationships are natural and acceptable, it seems that they are saying that the idea is so unbelievable that it could only be humor.

Am I a Hypocrite?

My sister asked me an interesting question the other day:
If you had a son, would you let him wear a dress to school?

She told me that in one of her classes, they were discussing the ways people are socialized into gender roles when they are young children through things as simple as the colors and style of clothing selected for them. Her professor told the class of a legal case in which a young boy was taken from his parents by Child Protective Services because they let him wear a dress to school.

The situation really had me considering my own actions. No, I don't pretend to live every moment of my life in a deliberate way. I'm sure not everything that I do exemplifies the ideas I support. I constantly listen to and enjoy music, movies, and television shows that I think send narrow messages about who people should be because of whatever physical, mental, or emotional characteristic they possess. But I was actually surprised by how long I considered the question.

Would I let my son wear a dress to school? Hmm... I would hope so. I hope I would ignore the rigid conception of gender that teaches young boys not to 'dress down' but affectionately calls young girls that wear 'boy's clothes' tomboys. Who decided clothing belonged to a gender anyway?

But I sat, reflecting on the question for at least 5 minutes before I claimed "Yes! Of course!" an answer easy to give when I know that I may never have to back it up. Actions may speak louder than words, but I hope my words aren't empty.

Single Ladies

There's been a lot of talk lately about President Obama's upcoming Supreme Court selection. The opening signals an opportunity to diversify the Highest Court in the land, a group of nine that have been determining the way laws are interpreted for the entire nation.

Most discussion in the media has centered on the gender of the nominee, with many certain that Obama will select a woman since of the nine Justices there is only one woman represented. I agree with the need for a more diverse collection of Justices (although no individual can ever accurately represent an entire gender, race, or ethnicity), but what I've found most interesting is the way gender has been discussed, specifically the representations of single women as they age.

The reports on most of the women on the short list have, in some way referenced their sexual orientation or marital status particularly the potential to have the first openly gay LGBT justice. While not completely irrelevant to their views on controversial issues like abortion and gay rights, it seems this focus illustrations a fixation of popular culture in general: middle-aged, unmarried women.

While unmarried men are portrayed as bachelor's choosing to remain single, women seem to be placed in three categories: the cougar, the spinster, and the lesbian. Because, after all, it makes no sense for a woman to ever choose to remain unmarried.


This idea has been particularly prevalent lately with the rising fame of Britain's Got Talent Contestant Susan Boyle and the airing of TVLand's new show The Cougar. Most of Boyle's media coverage centers around her 'homely appearance, ' particularly that she has said that she has never been kissed (much of it insisting that she get some kind of makeover). The TVLand show, meanwhile, positions its star as the polar opposite of Boyle: she is not only not virginal, she is 'on the prowl' to claim a younger man. Either asexual or hypersexual, 'unattractive' or attractive, the conception of unmarried, middle-aged women is undeniably narrow.

Misogyny in Response to Hate is Still Misogyny (or Why I Don't Hate [On] Carrie Prejean)

As I am not one for beating a dead horse, I thought I was finished talking about Miss California. But, it looks like the media have other plans. It seems like I can't open AOL Explorer without seeing some exciting, new information on the new "martyr for the right," Carrie Prejean.

Prejean has been praised/attacked/defended (everything but ignored) by virtually every mainstream media outlet and blog sense her previously mentioned answer on a question asked by Perez Hilton in the Miss USA pageant about the extension of gay marriage. It is fair to say that the comments on Prejean, whether you agreed or disagreed with her answer, have gone far beyond commentary on the issue at hand, particularly in this Keith Olbermann interview with comedian and author Michael Musto from April 30:




The pundit discusses the leak of the news that Miss California pageant officials paid for Prejean's breast implants (news that has recently been expanded to include the existence of topless photos of Prejean that some believe should disqualify her from holding the Miss California crown). Musto refers to Prejean as "a babe who needs a brain implant." He continues "Maybe they can inject some fat from her butt. Oh, they have?"

To say that I lean left and disagree with Miss California's opinion is a gross understatement, but I think it's fairly obvious why these comments and those like them are inappropriate responses to Prejean's ignorance. I agree that the pageant paying for the implants is an issue. Clearly, they are reinforcing a stereotype that the ideal body for the ideal woman selected to represent the nation must include large breasts (fake or not). But, I absolutely HATE the insinuation that having breast implants (or, in fact, appearing attractive by 'conventional standards') disqualifies a person's opinion. Is this any different from insisting that 'the fairer sex' remain in the home and let the big boys do the physical and mental heavy lifting?

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure I have 'hated on' Miss California at times. I have called Prejean an idiot on more than one occasion. I thought her original response and her responses to further questions on the issue lacked substance. And yes, I have called her ridiculous and opportunistic because I don't find it coincidental that she has suddenly found her calling in the movement to "protect marriage." The fact is, even if you think breast implants and topless pictures make her a 'slut' (a problematic word that I am using for convenience) they do not make her an 'idiot.'

I am not just worried about the coverage of Prejean as a step back for feminist causes. I'm also worried about the way the misogynistic responses are allowing her to be positioned as a sweet girl that is being persecuted for her beliefs. Isn't this just pandering to the people that claim that civil rights have the potential to burden society as a whole. What happened to the days of tossing pies? The message is getting muddled as people become more focused on the 'faults' of their opponents than the reasons why people need to reconsider judgment of one another. Essentially saying "She's just as immoral as we are," does not make the intended argument that 'immoral' is, indeed, subjective.

The Moral of this Post: You can't fight fire with fire. Don't judge and book by its cover. Don't hate the player, hate the game... something like tha

Challenging 'No Homo'

In the age of 'no homo,' I was more than suprised to hear Brian 'Birdman' Williams bluntly dismiss questions about a highly pulicized picture of a kiss between he and hip hop superstar Lil Wayne that showed up on the Internet in 2006. Hip hop fans are well aware of the close relationship between the two. Williams played a great role in Lil Wayne's success, discovering him at 12, giving him a record deal, and cultivating his skills. The father that he never had, Wayne calls Williams 'daddy' in both songs and interviews. Some fans even incorrectly believe that they are biologically related.

Williams recently spoke to a radio station about the picture that some hip hop fans still haven't left alone, despite the fact that he discussed the issue briefly when the picture first surfaced:


Given the hypersexual and homophobic image that it seems many African American male hip hop stars cultivate, I had wrongly assumed that if Baby (as Williams is also known by) ever responded to the photo again it would be to claim that it was photoshopped (as I, and I'm sure many others, had suspected anyway) or with the cure-all "no homo." While Williams does little to work against the homophobia that usually underlies the discussions about the picture as he still suggests that the kiss is only acceptable within certain parameters, he does disrupt the 'hypermasculine' conception of black men that causes some to view displays of affection as displays of weakness.

Umm...

A friend showed me this Schick Quattro for Women ad that ran recently in the UK. While it's extremely inappropriate (so much so that I'll spare you my comments), it's also too good not to share: