Submissions

Toward a New Aesthetic

A passionate, revolutionary call to attack the advertisers of feminine oppression.

30 comments on the article “Toward a New Aesthetic”

Displaying 11 - 20 of 30

Page 2 of 3

Anonymous

@ Anonymous (June11, 2010 4:33 pm): Nobody is making the assumption that she's talented; she just proved she's talented.

While I realize that this young woman is working with poetics to communicate her personal plight, I do, however, find it troubling that it is acceptable to describe this form of oppression as being particularly "feminine." That mindset is utterly antiquated. Young men have just as much to be concerned with. The shape of the oppression resulting from popular social interpretive structures is changing. We're all sick of it, and it takes its toll on all of us. The exclusion of male oppression from the discourse is more than a little tired- maybe you'll be hearing from me. :)

Anonymous

@ Anonymous (June11, 2010 4:33 pm): Nobody is making the assumption that she's talented; she just proved she's talented.

While I realize that this young woman is working with poetics to communicate her personal plight, I do, however, find it troubling that it is acceptable to describe this form of oppression as being particularly "feminine." That mindset is utterly antiquated. Young men have just as much to be concerned with. The shape of the oppression resulting from popular social interpretive structures is changing. We're all sick of it, and it takes its toll on all of us. The exclusion of male oppression from the discourse is more than a little tired- maybe you'll be hearing from me. :)

jtt

Actually, she did mention that "every guy she knows is concerned with whether he has six-pack abs" [paraphrase], and so I was impressed that she did have in mind that men do feel the pressure to look generically pretty, too.

But to be realistic: Still, today, battle of sexes notwithstanding, boys are pressured to be less emotional, and girls are pressured to be less physical.

jtt

Actually, she did mention that "every guy she knows is concerned with whether he has six-pack abs" [paraphrase], and so I was impressed that she did have in mind that men do feel the pressure to look generically pretty, too.

But to be realistic: Still, today, battle of sexes notwithstanding, boys are pressured to be less emotional, and girls are pressured to be less physical.

Anonymous

Sigh. The anonymous poster at 4:33 clearly missed the entire point. Being unattractive, or attractive for that matter, doesn't make you anything other than attractive or unattractive. Beauty does not equal intelligence, passion, empathy, creativity, wealth, valor or any of the other things we equate it with in our body-obsessed culture. Your ability to be attractive to another human being is a characteristic unto itself, which should be divorced from all the other meanings we have given it. And beauty should absolutely be removed from the position of no. 1 life-goal, where it resides for the vast majority of our population. Because beauty does not mean that you have anything else of worth. And further, there are too many people of tremendous worth that are ill-treated, or ignored, because of their lack of commercial beauty.

To 5:13 poster, yes, men get their share of being pressured to be attractive, and she nodes to that with the "we prefer aluminum over flesh" comment. But let's face it, if you compare the number of old men still having successful careers in music or movies, they outnumber women vastly. Also, it is still somehow acceptable for women running for elected office to be critiqued by mass news (news!) media on their hair, clothes, weight, shoes, height, makeup, and anything else purely supervicial and immaterial. When was the last time you heard a news story that talked about a male senator's choice of suit or haircut? We don't.

Women have made a lot of progress. We can vote, we can read, we can have jobs, make scientific discovery, and more. But we are not allowed to be fat, unstylish, or dowdy. If we are, it negates every other thing we have done. That is a problem.

Anonymous

Sigh. The anonymous poster at 4:33 clearly missed the entire point. Being unattractive, or attractive for that matter, doesn't make you anything other than attractive or unattractive. Beauty does not equal intelligence, passion, empathy, creativity, wealth, valor or any of the other things we equate it with in our body-obsessed culture. Your ability to be attractive to another human being is a characteristic unto itself, which should be divorced from all the other meanings we have given it. And beauty should absolutely be removed from the position of no. 1 life-goal, where it resides for the vast majority of our population. Because beauty does not mean that you have anything else of worth. And further, there are too many people of tremendous worth that are ill-treated, or ignored, because of their lack of commercial beauty.

To 5:13 poster, yes, men get their share of being pressured to be attractive, and she nodes to that with the "we prefer aluminum over flesh" comment. But let's face it, if you compare the number of old men still having successful careers in music or movies, they outnumber women vastly. Also, it is still somehow acceptable for women running for elected office to be critiqued by mass news (news!) media on their hair, clothes, weight, shoes, height, makeup, and anything else purely supervicial and immaterial. When was the last time you heard a news story that talked about a male senator's choice of suit or haircut? We don't.

Women have made a lot of progress. We can vote, we can read, we can have jobs, make scientific discovery, and more. But we are not allowed to be fat, unstylish, or dowdy. If we are, it negates every other thing we have done. That is a problem.

Pages

Add a new comment

Comments are closed.