Ad I’ve noticed – #1
October 21, 2012
Before I start waging my war on the ads we’re seeing, I’d like to do a bit of research – with you. I’m going to quickly discuss ads I’m seeing now – airing across the country, into family homes – and then (hopefully) gain some insight from you – see if there’s a reoccurring pattern in what our media outlets are unveiling to us and what messages they’re circulating.
I’d like to use you as a gauge. I – like everyone else – am not immune to seeing things a little less-of-centre at times and willingly admit this. It is all about perspective, after all, and I am deeply curious to learn whether we’re on the same page about this issue, that is deeply concerning to me.
Before I start, I want to explain that I don’t have cable TV, just free-to-air. I don’t turn on the telly until the evening, but really (especially in this ‘down season’) – I don’t watch much. This isn’t to say that the TV is switched off. It’s generally left on, in case we stumble upon something engaging to watch.
This means that as I’m cooking or writing, I do, on occasion, notice the ads. Obviously, when we think about ads, we automatically think of product selling, but there are also the ads for the TV shows themselves…and it’s the content in these ads that are also of great concern.
I’ve written previously about how TV is dumbing us down and how – as a capitalist, obsessed society – we’re possibly heading down a path towards The Seven Deadly Sins.
Well…isn’t it possible? If the answer is, “Yes” then what do we need to do?
I think the ads we’re being exposed to (children and teens especially) – together with a WHOLE smorgasbord of other factors and contributors – are changing the neural pathways of our brains. Conditioning us. More urgently, conditioning the way our youth perceive reality.
Ad #1. TV show – Glee.
Now, I’m not a fan of this show – ever since it started to drip in the hyper-sexualised behaviour of the girls; on top of knowing that their main fan base are young girls. I wrote a post about another ad for Glee a while back (with the clip attached). They are not promoting healthy messages, which is a shame considering the reach they have.
The new season is apparently about to start and we are, of course, getting bombarded by the promotional tsunami that seems to come with the start of new television show seasons.
I wasn’t able to find the clip of the ad that’s being aired in Australia, so I’ll just describe the simple, yet dangerous, messages I think the ad is delivering to young girls and women.
Two things.
One: Kate Hudson plays a new character in the series as a dance instructor at what appears to be a high end place in New York (NY Ballet?), that the main girl Rachel now attends. Kate’s character appears fearless, bellowing how the majority of them are going to fail etc. etc.
She walks up to one of the new students and says:
“Hi. What’s your name? Muffin Top?” (when some fat sits over the top of your pants)
“No, my name is-”
“No. You’re name is Muffin Top. From now on it’s rice crackers and ipecac (a drink that makes you vomit). Cut off a butt-cheek. You have to lose a few pounds.”
And the girl is slim. Plus it really bothers me that it’s a fellow woman being so callous.
Message: If you look at that girl and they’re saying she’s fat (which she’s not) – what am I?
Subliminal message received. Neural pathways are now shifting, due to negative self thoughts about weight and self esteem. Check.
Many will argue that that’s the way it is in these sorts of high pressure dancing institutions and the show is representing realism. Oh, now they’re calling the realism card? That’s a tiny morsel of ‘realism’ compared the heightened misrepresentation that oozes from other issues within shows such as this.
Two: In the grand old tradition of building a female star (whether it be an actress or a singer) as an innocent, wide-eyed virginal type of girl – there comes the time when she must toss all that aside, along with its innocent followers and admirers, and become ‘nasty’.
Rachel now has to be taken ‘seriously’ and must shed her chaste appearance and prove she’s someone to be reckoned with. So we hear Rachel singing, not once but twice during the ad, the following line of the song she will perform on the show (once with a visual showing a tough and sexy Rachel):
“I’m not that innocent”
A line from a Britney Spears song. How apt – a fellow innocent-turned-nasty girl…along with Christina Aquilera, Miley Cyrus…and the list goes on.
Message: Noone will take me seriously unless I sexualise myself to gain attention.
Subliminal message received. Neural pathways are now shifting, due to negative thoughts about not looking sexy and hot enough to gain attention and recognition – the only way to get it. Check.
Why do they do this to one famous, female young star after another? To add to the fan base.
In the documentary, Missrepresentation, we were informed that the main people who watch TV are women…so it doesn’t matter what you show them, as it seems they lap up everything that’s presented to them – especially the younger ones.
However, the ones who watch the least TV, are males between the ages of 18-mid/late twenties? Something like that. So shows are predominantly motivated to getting their full attention – and how else can you get a young, hormone ridden boy/teen/male to watch your show?
Sexualise the girls.
So the bottom line is that they don’t care who watches, just as long as they are.
Anything for a buck, right?
Question #104: Do these examples set off alarm bells, no matter how small, as to what’s being subliminally taught?
Here is a lovely image of the actress who plays Rachel (Michele Lea), contributing her efforts to collecting that new fan base for the network and share holders, by posing for GQ magazine.
We have a long way to go, ladies. Can’t have a picture like this without the woman’s consent.
And consent they do.
Deep Breath.
x
That’s not misogyny. THIS is misogyny.
October 18, 2012
The following is one of many issues that has me livid – more at the apathetic attitudes of society, than anything else.
There is true misogyny in our culture – and it is malevolent. It has always existed towards women of all ages, but as it steadily moves down the ranks, it just makes me wonder at what point we’re all going to kick-start our protesting voices and do something about it. Misogyny is now targeting our Tweens or, as my high school students inform me, ‘Twelvies’.
Last week the disgusting Facebook Page, 12 yr old Slut Memes – a site that used photos of ‘Twelvies’ already on the net (or sent in by others), to then make degrading and sexist comments – was finally closed by the two 19 year old Queenslander men/boys/creators, studying at QUT.
But not by Facebook – they defended it to stay live and still do. The end truly came for these guys, when reports the Federal Police would investigate were heard. So they pulled the plug (although they vow to be back) – but Facebook still thinks sites like these are just fine and dandy.
This is evidenced by the fact that many copycat pages have sprung up in its place and are not only staying, but spreading – like venom – by supporters and perpetuators of this way of thinking.
It pains me and fills me with despair to see this type of behaviour unfold – with permission. Doesn’t it stir the same indignation in you?
Melinda Tankard Reist wrote this great post covering this atrocious state of affairs. Its title is a quote from the men “As long as there are sluts we will put them in their place“.
Sluts. That’s misogyny.
Now, last week I heard outrage and FURIOUS anger over the Speaker of the House, Peter Slipper having sent lewd text messages to another bloke. The pitchforks have well and truly been pulled out by our purer-than-driven-snow, holier-than-thou, fellow Australians and they are being kept handy by the front door – but only when it’s connected with politics, it seems.
Question #103: Are you willing to put those pitchforks to good use and stop pages like 12 Yr old Slut Memes, that do SO much more damage than text messages that were sent by one man to one other?
There is a virtual library of photos out there (taken by an obsessed younger generation) – pictures of young girls looking hyper-sexualised – that these men are exploiting because it’s just. so. funny.
But all those girls are someone’s daughter…and more often than not, come from good parents; parents who are fighting a battle against a media campaign that is breeding boys who become men like these 19 year olds…
…and girls, of course, who participate in their own exploitation. This look is the fashion, after all.
How do we do what’s right?
1. We channel our outrage where it’s needed, by stopping misogynistic sites – whatever and wherever they are – that have Internet reach and;
2. Teach our girls that their worth has NOTHING to do with their fervour to look a certain way to gratify boys’ sexual preferences (based more and more on porn), possibly gain their approval and therefore attain some sort of validation.
In terms of the text messages sent by Slipper (which were filth, by the way), I’m pretty sure that if you checked the mobile phones – hell, even just the Facebook Pages and statuses – of maaaany men, you would find much, much worse.
How about fighting them? This Facebook page had over 200,000 ‘likes’ (followers). Surely that’s more damaging and alarming than the texts between two men.
Ironically, last week’s incensed reaction from the public, turned a searing spotlight on those text messages – that were also leaked and given a massive amount of importance, fuelled by the media – messages with content that, should it be heard coming from a band of guys at the pub, would not have made anyone bat an eyelid.
The definition of misogyny is: a hatred of women.
But yesterday, the Macquarie Dictionary added a definition to the word:
– a deep prejudice against women.
This article from the Financial Review, Macquarie misogyny definition change reignites gender debate discusses the change.
I believe most men fall somewhere on the sexism spectrum and only men know where they themselves sit on that particular fence.
Wherever it is you sit – guys – will determine whether you think sites like the 12 Yr old Slut Memes deserves your action or whether you think it’s funny.
Do you think it’s funny?
How about channelling some indignation towards helping liberate our world of the endless and ATTAINABLE hatred of females infecting our world – especially on women and young girls like these. It is the sphere in which our kids and teens are developing and it’s an emergency.
Do you think you could rise up against that?
Start writing emails – start taking your business elsewhere – anything.
It worked against Alan Jones…keep going.
Deep Breath.
x
Question #92: What do you think?
September 13, 2012
I saw the following segment when I was flicking channels. The sports part of the news came on and…well, you understand. Ellen was on and I saw Reece Witherspoon was coming up…and I like her and so I thought I’d stick around.
But it wasn’t an interview with Ellen, she was having ‘Tea with Sophia Grace and Rosie’.
I thought, on one level, it’s ‘cutish’ BUT for the most part I thought – This is sort of imagery and behaviour that is making our problem worse.
It’s cute, but ALL the compliments, from both the girls and (mainly) Reece, are about what they’re wearing and their attractiveness.
There is a moment where one of the girls breaks into singing a few lines of Adele’s song (Rolling in the Deep, I think it was)…and it’s wonderful. She’s amazing, actually.
So why the circus show?
Question #93: Why can’t we showcase every girl’s wonderfulness, without those narrow, fickle images where girls can only talk about how pretty they are?
I’d love you to watch it and tell me what you think…
My response to a comment. Abortion #2.
September 8, 2012
In a comment responding to my last post, Harley wrote the following – an analogy on abortion:
“An embryo is a blueprint for a human, but is not yet a human. Comparing the removal of such an unwanted blueprint, to murder, is like comparing tearing up a plan for a beautiful house, to taking a wrecking ball to a beautiful house.”
I think that’s perfect.
It’s opened a need for me to write the following:
I wrote an essay at uni, when I took up a unit of Philosophy – this comment has just reminded me of it! It was a paper about abortion and I had to argue for or against it. Pity it was written in the time of typewriters, because it’s long gone and I’d love to be able to read what I wrote…
Whilst at uni – the birthplace of my first serious relationship – I always reasoned that, should I accidentally fall pregnant (even though I was taking precautions), I would NOT have an abortion. But whilst writing my essay, I couldn’t – in my soul – feel I could ‘take sides’ and judge a woman’s reason for having to have one, by being ‘anti-abortion’.
I respect life – but I was leaning more towards the woman, than the foetus. Why? Because with all my well thought out, good intentions about abortion…what if one day I DID need to have one? I knew that if I did have to come to that decision, it would be the hardest, most gut-wrenching and heartbreaking decision I would ever have to make. And would be still.
Women don’t casually go and get one done, like a pedicure. In their lunch hour. If there WERE women who took the whole thing a little more casually (the rest being psychologically affected in some way – however small) – they would be the minority. But even THEY risk the possibility of terminating their chance to have children ever again.
Noone wins in this situation…I would even go on the line and say, no woman EVER wins.
So in my essay, I sided with women – siting that whilst the foetus cannot survive outside the womb, it’s not truly a person – especially as a teeny tiny one. The blueprint.
Today, as always, women are being immorally shortchanged by the men in power – the law makers. Because not giving women the freedom and right of choice, is wrong. It’s not fair.
There’s a simple, unjust reason for this (amongst many) – TWO people make a baby, but the person being judged and forced to have it and raise the child alone (in too many instances), is the woman – regardless of circumstance. One rule.
BUT…the man can walk away.
Question #90: How can men in government, knowing the freedom that their gender affords them, doom women to stick to the birth – and all the complications that come with the baby – and pass laws without women’s voices being heard and taken into account?
Where’s the rule that forces the man – by law – to be obligated to stick around and be an emotional and financial support? If the argument is that the foetus is a real person, then shouldn’t the father be obliged to begin that support from conception?
It’s only fair.
We should send this idea on!
Deep, frustrated breath for my sisters.
x
A serious double whammy.
September 8, 2012
The United States continues to be in the throes of debate…and all over women’s bodies. Again. With men in politics voicing their opinions about women’s bodies. Again.
They seem to be in a political fervour and the latest CORKER comes from a Republican named Todd Akin.
In the article Todd Akin, what exactly is ‘legitimate’ rape?”, Akin is quoted, in his attempt to fortify his anti-abortion stance, as saying:
“It seems to me first of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Speechless.
When we find ourselves turning to a panel consisting of a majority of men, to determine the rules as to what women are allowed to do with their bodies – there’s something terribly wrong.
At the start of the year, I went to see Eve Ensler speak and she had this to say to Akin:
Dear Mr Akin, I want you to imagine…
If I can add a little spin of black humour to all this, watch the following clip:
Although we may laugh – it simply allows us to cover over how despondent we truly feel.
Now. What do I think about rape.
I know that the majority of women have either experienced rape, sexual assault, inappropriate touching and a gazillion other situations. The fact that the stories are literally ENDLESS has to say something about our culture. OK, so it’s not a new phenomenon, BUT you cannot deny that the representation of sex in the media and the saturation of porn, is having an ever more detrimental effect on our developing youth. The cases of rape to girls under the age of 12 is staggering – the film Miss Representation put the percentage at 15%.
I recently spoke to a male parent I know and he said he had to throw out a game his teenage son was playing (which he attained from another male friend) – where you got bonus points for rape.
BONUS POINTS FOR RAPE. It made me feel sick when he told me…as well as so helpless for our kids. I’ll be honest, there’s a tinge of despair as well.
1 in 6 have experienced rape or attempted rape. I am one of the 1 in 6 (attempted).
I had a guy I had not even spoken to at a university party, follow me to my college room – chit-chatting on the way. I used to collect Coke bottles and memorabilia and he feigned an interest, walked into my room and locked the door behind him. He told me that it would just take a second and that he didn’t want to have to get rough. I knew that I wasn’t a match physically, so I acted like it would be great, but that I wasn’t feeling up to it. He pushed me down on my bed by the neck a few times as well as try to take off my top. Luckily for me, I managed to get out into the corridor where he got (verbally) very angry, but we were out in the open, so I was spared.
I have never been more terrified. Just because he didn’t actually rape me, doesn’t mean that I didn’t experience pure panic inside.
But you know what? When word got around, people started to take sides – because he was a ‘nice guy’. I hadn’t even spoken to him at the college party – not a word. And yet, judgement was made against me.
ENOUGH!
Enough judgement.
Question #88: Why isn’t more being done to STOP rape – rather than working out what is or isn’t classified as rape; or what the woman did or didn’t do?
I read a phrase that says – “Don’t compare your life to others; you have no idea what their journey is all about.”
Which brings me to other point in this debate – abortion.
It’s none of my business what a woman decides for herself. I DONT KNOW HER STORY OR SITUATION. If we are so naive as to think that the majority of women take the decision lightly – then we’re believing an illusion that’s been fabricated.
The majority of women who have abortions are already mothers, who simply cannot support another child.
I have seen teen girls overseas begging on the streets because they can’t afford the child they (may) have been forced to keep. Is this child really going to be the next Einstein? Or is it more likely that it will live a life of misery, abuse and/or poverty?
“Every woman should be empowered and have the right to determine when she wants to have a child. The right to own her future and provide for her children’s futures. The right to participate freely and equally in society.” (via UPWORTHY)
The bottom line for me is this:
Question #89: What about the WOMAN’S life? (the one that’s already established)
But in terms of The United States and their heavy anti-abortion stance, it’s curious – as my friend Jane said to me – that for a country that’s so pro-life, they are also pro-guns and pro-war. (Not ALL of course, it just how they’re perceived). I’ve always seen it as absurd and surreal, that anti-abortionists, want – and do at times – kill doctors…
*shaking my lowered, saddened head*
Deep Breath.
x
DON’T buy into it. Yep – it’s a Shout Out. #4.
September 2, 2012
I’ve had an epiphany – a bit of an ‘a-ha’ moment. Well, it wasn’t so much that I didn’t know it before, but more that I was hit with a simple and succinct realisation.
It’s the simplicity of it that is both liberating and equally terrifying – because regardless of its clarity – we are trapped.
You know all the famous modern icons? – I can’t believe what we call them ‘icons’ for – icons like Kim Kardashian?
We’re paying them.
In turn, they spend the money we give them on ‘perfecting’ themselves:
On make-up – THEY DON’T PAY FOR.
On clothes – THEY DON’T PAY FOR.
On ‘procedures’ – THEY DON’T PAY FOR.
Cars – Technology – ‘Gift Bags’ – EVERYTHING!…they don’t pay.
We do.
And then we worship them for creating the image we can never have (as I wrote in my penultimate post Why it’s worse now) and buy more beauty products, clothes, ‘procedures’ to try to replicate it. In turn, we keep fattening their pay packets, as the beauty industry uses them over and over again – making them icons.
THIS IS PURE INSANITY!
This vicious cycle is not only never-ending – its predatory qualities and hunger appear to be insatiable.
OK, here comes a Shout Out.
We are intelligent beings, ladies – VERY intelligent:
Question #87: So why are we doing it to ourselves? WHY?
And we are doing it from both sides – one side (the majority of us) perpetuate it by BUYING into this mono; limiting; ‘hot’ look, while on the other side, we also have the women who agree to represent us so poorly and participate in our exploitation that way.
It’s a trap.
As a fly is digested slowly in the Venus Fly Trap, so are we.
I don’t know about you, but that’s why this clarity is a tad terrifying to me – because its EFFECTS are devastating. Statistics are showing girls and women spiralling into a world of depression and worse. I even know many mothers who loathe their bodies after growing a human being in them – instead of wearing their shape with a pure sense of pride – of the miracles their bodies are.
But, as I said in response to a comment from the above-mentioned post, EVERYTHING IS TAUGHT. Everything.
So it’s time. Regardless of what’s happened in the past – the only way to move forward is to say, “OK, yes, we used to do it like that or accept things as they are – but not any more.
Do not pay any attention to women like Lara Bingle, who so graciously had the following picture of herself taken (which has also been photoshopped to an inch of its life):
…because as I’ve said to my students at school – ANYONE CAN DO THAT! Anyone can have sex. Anyone can take their clothes off. It’s not a difficult thing to do…and yet we end up rewarding women for doing just that??
The challenging and hard thing is NOT doing it the easy way – through shortcuts – as there’s always a price to pay…
…and ain’t we paying for it now!
The irony being that the money from our pockets, provides the funding for more.
I repeat: Why are we doing it to ourselves?
Deep Breath everyone – it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
x
Why it’s worse now.
September 2, 2012
I was cooking and my 9 year old daughter was keeping me company, chatting. It was great.
Yesterday, when I let her play on the computer, which is normally some sort of simple game, I went in to find her doing a ‘make-over’ on some cartoon girl. I told her to get off it. She didn’t make a fuss. Bless her.
So we were chatting about that tonight. I said that, in a way, that game was training her to become a girl who grooms herself in a particular way. I said that there was nothing wrong with wearing makeup when she’s older, but that girls and women nowadays were spending A LOT of money to look a particular way.
I said to her that when I was younger, I loved going through women’s magazines but that ‘back then’ the images were of the women as they were. Don’t get me wrong, we were being sold a particular image – thin, glamorous, in the latest looks…thin – BUT they were fairly real. No airbrushing…lots of make-up – but no airbrushing.
Throughout these modern times – since mid-last century – women have always been sold a look; in line with the fashion of the time. And we have always jumped on that wagon, hoping to mirror that look and belong. That’s cool. We are the fairer sex and we like to groom ourselves.
But it’s worse now.
Why? Because the looks and bodies we’re trying to mirror – are altered and unattainable ones.
Simple, isn’t it?
The logic of it is striking and obvious – and yet…
…here we are ladies – watching women on our screens, posters, ads – depicting the shangri-las of looks – that we can’t have because they are simply. not. real.
Question #85: Why is the unaltered image above, not considered beautiful?
Because there are some rolls…like the ones we all have? Because she has a tummy…like most women?
God forbid we represent the general female population in our media!
Now look at the women around you – your friends – your family.
Do you think they’re all ugly?
They must be if they’re not thin, ‘hot’ and sexy…with no wrinkles etc. etc. etc.
But the majority of women DO NOT fit that tiny mould and I’m also pretty sure that you don’t think any such thing about the women in your life. So, if we think the ordinary and remarkable women around us are beautiful:
Question #86: Why are we being passive and tolerate what the media is doing to the representation of women?
And we are being passive.
Just look at what’s been done to the images of the women below – for magazines that women buy:
Even Barbie – or any doll for that matter (Bratz, anyone?) – sells a look to girls from a young age.
It’s up to us to change this. Noone else can do it – certainly not men. That would be as futile as women changing men’s perspectives.
It’s up to us.
Deep Breath.
x
Without women…Just sayin’ – #8
August 11, 2012
A short post…although I’ve had trouble posting it. Sorry if it keeps reappearing – this should be it.
Now to the issue at hand…
I can’t believe a woman agreed to pose for this shot.
This shot.
Being violently grabbed – violence being represented in three ways – by a fully dressed man.
Dominated.
She’s nobody. Nothing. Invisible.
Inferior.
So demeaning.
…and yet it’s glamorised with her smoking!
A casual way to spend the evening, perhaps?
What exactly does she get out of this?
Money?
At what price?
More importantly, what did she teach him?
So it comes down to this:
Question #81: How are we supposed to rise above our situation, when women like this continue to participate in promoting our exploitation?
Worse still, they’re becoming more and more mainstream. Just look at your TV. Or your Facebook Timeline. The following is an ad that appeared on a female friend’s Timeline:
Without women…(you complete the sentence).
…Just sayin’
Deep Breath
x
The Seven Deadly Sins.
August 5, 2012
Question #79: Is our media, and in turn reality, teaching our kids that the only way to ‘succeed’, is by feeding our Deadly Sins?
I look around and I feel surrounded – like I’m in the middle of an old-fashioned, cowboy-style ambush.
* Greed * Lust * Wrath * Sloth * Gluttony * Envy * Pride – transgressions that I read are ‘fatal to spiritual progress’.
They’re everywhere.
WHY?
Yes, they’ve always been around. Of course. The Deadly Sins weren’t written a few years ago in a boardroom – they’re ancient.
I’ve always seen them as a warning – that to indulge in them would lead to chaos. Hell on Earth.
I don’t think we’re quite there yet.
But…
There is one society that is yielding to them more than others…and it’s our capitalist one.
While the majority of the planet wallows in poverty/war/despair of some sort (due to their rulers participating in some Deadly tastes of their own) – we basically live in a luxury that’s unfathomable and unattainable to them.
You’d think we’d be satisfied, wouldn’t you? And yet…according to studies, we are the most affluent we’ve ever been in history – but the most depressed.
Doesn’t this ring any alarm bells?
Our predominant drive? To make money.
Am I saying we shouldn’t? Absolutely not! I could always do with a little more – couldn’t we all? It IS the world we live in – we need it to survive here.
But at what price?
Our society’s hunger for more of everything and the latest of that, is giving me the uneasy feeling that we are starting to flirt with danger.
Not including the majority of ‘have-nots’ equally inhabiting this planet – we are spoilt. And we are few, in comparison to the big picture.
Yet we consume at a pace that is starting to become insatiable and is being bred into this generation of children and young adults.
So as the ‘line to cross’ has to move further behind to get an ‘edge’ on consumption – how is it done today?
By tapping into the taboo, the naughty, the violent, the lazy, the greedy, the depraved…then market it and SELL!
So, yes, I’m starting to feel boxed in by our media and how it’s becoming the teat from which our society suckles – predominantly a pornographic one.
The frustrating part is that I know that there are many, many of you who can see how things are travelling down a soul-less path, as I do; who are doing the very best they can with their children and share my frustration…
…but we’re obviously not enough. We are in the minority.
I can only look at the evidence before my eyes:
1. What I’m seeing in my daily life through (predominantly, but not exclusive to) TV and its ads, Internet, Magazines etc. etc. etc.
2. The choices our youth are making through their behaviour and appearance. Choices that make me question: Where are their parents in this equation?
Today I saw something that chilled me: A book being sold by Amazon (but has since been removed) giving a world guide to sex laws called,
Age of Consent: A Sex Tourists’ Guide
It claims:
“In some countries it is even illegal to have sex outside of marriage, with severe consequences if you are caught doing so! On the flip side, there are many countries on this planet where the age of consent is as low as 12 or 13…whilst one country has no age limit whatsoever! Before travelling, whether you are going as a backpacker, for business purposes, or as a sex tourist, you need to invest in this comprehensive guide to the age of consent laws in every country in the world! It will keep your fun legal!…This $3.49 will keep you out of jail, possibly the most important few dollars that any red blooded testosterone pumped traveller will spend.”
This utterly sickens me – because what I keep questioning is how did something as disgusting as this get printed in the first place? HOW?
Money.
Now, I won’t bore you with a list of how consumption is dancing with the Seven Deadly Sins – but it feels like we’re going down a slippery slope and picking up speed.
There is too much evidence.
How do we slow down this beast/machine, that’s bearing down on us?
Simple. Don’t buy into it!
Those Sins are in all of us – we all feel them at one stage or another…I know I ceratinly have…
Question #80: So why are we allowing them to take over?
The images throughout the post, are of the Seven Deadly Sins from a 2008 ImageFX competition. They uniquely connected with me – I can easily see how these are very present in our lives. The curious thing, however, is that when I looked for images on the Net – they predominantly featured women only. Interesting.
Deep Breath.
x
Don’t make them right!
July 20, 2012
In lieu of the recent discussion about ‘quality’ television, it made me question what we’re becoming as an audience.
The general response, by the people who defend shows like, The Shire or Jersey Shore etc. etc. etc. is, “It’s so bad, it’s good!” or “It’s just for a laugh!”
But when pushed for an articulate explanation as to what it is they ‘like’ about it or how it’s funny…there is only the sounds of crickets.
That’s because there is nothing they can say about the tripe they’re watching – in fact, some of them explain with an, “I dunno, it just is.”
Yet they’re popping up everywhere. Why? Because it’s what the creators and producers think we want.
Is it?
Well, the tragic part is that it does appear to be what the masses want. I’m sure there will be many people glued to their seats, watching the next gripping and exciting installment of their favourite show of ‘tacky and fickle’.
Are they in the majority?
We appear like a nation of dumb and mindless, when these sort of shows are afforded our attention…and they gain ratings.
Question #75: Is there no sense of pride – knowing that we appear so easy to dupe?
This INFURIATES me because thanks to this perception, a lot of us are being held to ransom, as the choices of what to watch – for entertainment – are so limited.
Worse still, people are making money off it. Your attention = money.
We need to be more frugal with who gets our attention because at the moment, it appears that when a ‘carrot’ with big boobs is dangled – we follow – like children behind the Pied Piper.
Or we say nothing.
A few years ago, when I was on an excursion with students, I noticed that there was a new energy drink in the shops, called Pussy.
I talked to the students in my year group about seeing this drink. I told them of how I imagined the guy who thought it up – thinking about how he would get rich – he himself imagining guys saying to each other, “I’m going to drink some Pussy!” *HawHawHaw/SnortSnort*
I said to them, “Don’t make him right! Do not give him a cent!”
I urge you to think the same way about what’s being dished out and sold to us as being ‘popular’. Step back and take a look at the core of what’s being sold.
In these sorts of shows, the message that keeps hammering us over the head – on BIG screen TVs across the country – is that young women are not worth our attention, if they don’t have a certain type of vanity attached to their behaviour. This can manifest itself in a spectrum of ways – through clothes, make-up, plastic surgery, conversations, ACTIONS! – and the guys?…well, I didn’t see much about them in the first episode of The Shire – it mainly focused on those girls – and I don’t intend to watch anymore to find out either. My brain cells are still recovering from the first encounter.
So, what sort of audience member are you?
Don’t you want – DESERVE – something better?
Deep Breath
x
Questions for Us 