Filed under: pop culture — posted by Chris @ 11:46 am
Here’s a treat to bolster our national mood as we await an Idol Rolling Stone night that’s threecontestantsshy of being enjoyable (now statistically proven). EW.com put together a great slideshow of the 14 Kisses That Made You Cringe. This ranges from the obvious (Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley) to the OMG-I-had-blocked-that-out (Angelina Jolie and her brother). For me, the funniest ones are not from real-life, but from movies — where actors (or, say, Prince) make poor choices and no director recognizes the problem (and no editor bails us out). Are there any lip-locks missing you’d like to “see” on this list?
Can you smell the aroma of manufactured manliness? Because there is an epic, and pungent, battle underway in the men’s personal care aisle. [Yesterday], Advertising Age declare[d] that we are seeing “the biggest array of product launches for men in nearly a decade and maybe ever.” The major competitors in this pissing contest: Procter & Gamble, which is responsible for Old Spice and Gillette, and Unilever’s new line, Dove Men+Care (apparently a plus sign equals masculinity).
Chances are you’re already familiar with Old Spice’s latest offering –namely Isaiah Mustafa, the charming star of its viral “I’m on a horse” ad, which bashes “lady-scented body wash” and orders dudes to “smell like a man, man.” The spot is full of satire and swagger — a winning combo, especially for men whose choice of personal armor is ironic cockiness. And as AdAge notes, “An ad for Gillette’s body wash, with a fairly obvious proxy for the new Dove product in the shower, pointedly says, ‘Just because it says it’s for men doesn’t mean it is.'” Nyah-nyah, Gillette just said you smell like a woman! Whatchu gonna do about that, Dove?
Nothing, judging from the Dove “Manthem,” which you’ll find below. Above all else, a Dove man is comfortable. Really, really comfortable. He doesn’t need to thump his chest to prove his manliness — that’s what his wife, three kids and home are for, it seems. He’s succeeded as a man (read: a pro-creator and provider) and so he can calmly retreat to his bathroom sanctuary and lather himself with an unpretentious body wash that doesn’t scream “FOR REAL MEN ONLY.” He is settled in his domesticated bliss and doesn’t need a damn horse, OK?
I don’t know about you, but I am fascinated by these dueling masculine identities. Bring on the advertainment.
Back in high school, my sister and I came up with a flawless policy: the only guys worth dating were either Jewish or Italian. It was some ill-informed, possibly offensive stereotyping whose underlying basis was a premium on swarthy looks and/or in-your-face intellectualism.
Of course, this schoolgirl theorizing fell apart in the harsh light of reality, and we both ended up going out with a variety of types (a.k.a. “people”).
At this point in my life, I have been attracted to enough off-the-menu body-styles and personalities that I cannot claim to have any “type” at all.
I was reminded of this while reading Lemondrop’s post about The Secret Guy ‘Types’ Women Lust After, and trying to come up with some ridiculously reductive categories that they may have missed. E.g., I.T. guys. Â Personal trainers with hearts of gold. Mail carriers. Daytime bartenders.
What a rollercoaster of emotions we’re feeling at BG today. We found this blog entry via Wired from OK Cupid, noting a bias in their dating pool against women of a certain age (“a certain age” being a year or two older than you are, but whatever).
The good: It’s a veritable candy store of charts, graphs, a javascript widget (ooh! shiny!), and the like. Plus, the blogger, Christian, makes his case enthusiastically, circling the ages 30-45 and labeling it the “Zone of Greatness.” Plus, he’s done extensive research (statistical research, you naughty-minded harlots) to support the thesis that older women are more sexually willing, open-minded, and hotsy totsy. Sure, in an ideal world he’d be all “and they have the most beautiful minds!” but given that we’re talking about a dating site, we have to assume a certain meat-market mentality. And how!
Plus, that’s only part of his picture. And with phrases like this:
There are two operative stereotypes of older single women: the sad-sack (Ã la Bridget Jones) and the “cougar” (Ã la Samantha from Sex In The City) and both, like all stereotypes, are reductionist and stupid and I’ve tried to avoid them. I hesitated beginning my case for older women with something about their sexuality, like I did in Exhibit A, because that territory borders right on cougar country. But the evidence there was too compelling to ignore.
Christian reveals himself to be a FOBG in a BW (big way). We luuurve him.
Plus, the comments section speaks well of OK Cupid users.
So why the roller coaster? The original premise. Like the one bad review in a sea of raves, we keep mulling it over and wondering if all the blog posts in the world will knock any sense into unwilling minds. What do you think?
Lauren Graham in More Magazine: “I’ve only connected with people I met by accident,†she says. “My first boyfriend in high school was the guy who sat in front of me, because, you know, alphabetically we were soul mates. I looked at the back of his head long enough that I was like, ‘I think I’m in love with you.’ †Any pressure she might feel about settling down is external, not internal. “What is so funny to me is I’m in a profession where two percent of people are working, yet there’s still this implication that you’re not completely successful if you’re single and in your forties,” she says. “Well, why not? I wanted a horse when I was growing up too. Does that mean I’m not successful, because I don’t have a horse?”
Turned out that 9-year-old Noah Cyrus, sister of Miley, is not launching her own lingerie line (SHOCK Perez Hilton got the story wrong SHOCK). But that doesn’t mean we’re not going to hell in a skimpy, midriff-baring handbasket.
The real shonda, as Tablet Magazine’s (and FOBG) Marjorie Ingall points out, is that the Cyrus story, after all, was credible. (“This didn’t seem shocking, since Noah was photographed on Halloween at a children’s AIDS fundraiser in a slinky black dominatrix outfit, sexy makeup, and knee-high, high-heeled, black, shiny PVC boots, then seen in the boots again the next day, along with a super-short ruffly polka-dot mini, black sheer stockings, and a black spaghetti-strapped top. A few weeks later she was filmed performing Akon’s ‘Smack That’ (‘Smack that/give me some more/Smack that/Till you get sore’) while smacking her own teeny butt. And then there was that time she played around on the stripper pole.)”
But Ingall isn’t there to Cyrus-shame. Framed in the context of traditional Jewish notions of modesty (“tznius“), though relevant to anyone who has ever been, all, “That tween is wearing what?!”, her question is: How do we teach our daughters, collectively speaking, to not (un)dress like that, to not be pulled in by porn-glam, to enjoy and love and respect their bodies — all without instilling a sense of shame and fear and something to hide? There’s a “shaming,” “hectoring” kind of “modesty,” Ingall observes, that objectifies them just as much as microminis.
Here’s what she suggests:
“Maybe we can all agree that one kind of modesty worth embracing is one that preserves childhood—when children are unashamed of their bodies and think “hot†only refers to the temperature of the bath water—as long as possible. Tznius 2.0 would involve keeping newborns away from spike heels (Heelarious high heels for babies, I’m talking to you!) and toddlers away from Bratz dolls. It wouldn’t stuff little boys into outmoded gender roles by discouraging play with “girly†toys. And nobody would wear a Huggies Thong. /snip/
Ultimately, I think, the pinnacle of this new modesty would involve teaching our kids to value themselves for who they are rather than what they wear, whether that’s a floor-length denim skirt or a micro-mini. Of course, we want our kids to know they’re more than their looks. I’m just not sure how we achieve that. It’s easy to be horrified at the little Noahs…But more nuanced struggles with self-expression aren’t easy for anybody.”
I dare say that this new modesty, to the degree that we can achieve it, would also better prepare our chilluns for dating and the immodest stirrings of young lurrrve. Glib as it may sound, if they truly value themselves — no matter how much of themselves is showing — they’ll only get all goopy over people who truly value them, too. Insofar as young boy/girlfriends are accessories, they’ll choose ones that make them feel good in their own skin.
“Sense of humor:” it’s in pretty much everyone’s top three requirements for a mate, and fair enough (though I say hey, don’t settle, go for “grasp” of humor, or heck, “mastery”). But when it comes to getting laughs, do men (or, OK, lesbians) face a tougher crowd? A New Scientist article about the neuro-circuitry of comedy contains this interesting morsel:
“Men and women…seem to process jokes slightly differently. Although both sexes laugh at roughly the same number of jokes, women show greater activity in the left prefrontal cortex than men (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol 102, p 16496). “This suggests a greater degree of executive processing and language-based decoding,” says [researcher Dean Mobbs]. As a result, women take significantly longer than men to decide whether they find something funny*, though that doesn’t seem to spoil their enjoyment of the joke. Indeed, women show a greater response in the limbic system than men, suggesting they feel a greater sense of reward.”
*Margin of error: One Super Bowl. ADS NOT FUNNY**: this we knew in a nano.
Way back in sheesh, 1999, long before we could embed video, we (specifically, Mikki Halpin) reviewed FOBG Sarah Jacobson’s Mary Jane’s Not A Virgin Any More, “an amazing coming-of-age story…about the slow, sputtering start of sexuality and self-awareness.” (More: “You thought the sex-in-a-car scene in Titanic was hot? Wait until you see this one! Not to mention the masturbation scenes, the sex-in-a-graveyard scene, the how-I-lost-my-virginity-scenes, the coming-out scene, and the “What is a clitoris?” speech. Plus comedic relief from Jello Biafra!”) Tragically, the brilliant Sarah died in 2004 at the age of 32.
Now — tomorrow, in fact — in Sarah’s much-celebrated memory, Mikki and friends present:
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE FABULOUS SARAH JACOBSON
An evening to honor DIY filmmaker Sarah Jacobson
And a benefit for the Sarah Jacobson Film Grant
February 15, 2010
7 pm doors, 8 pm show
Glasslands Gallery, Brooklyn, NY
On Monday, February 15, 2010, filmmakers, punk rockers, feminists, and musicians will gather to remember filmmaker Sarah Jacobson (1970–2004). The evening will include an appearance from Sarah’s mother Ruth Jacobson, and her sister Lee Jacobson. There is a $5 suggested donation at the door, and all proceeds will go to the Sarah Jacobson Film Grant, which supports independent young women filmmakers.
Sarah Jacobson (1971–2004) was a a filmmaker who wrote, produced, and directed several movies in the 1990s, including “Mary Jane’s Not A Virgin Any More†and “I Was a Teenage Serial Killer.†Sarah’s films reflected her punk sensibilities, her feminist beliefs, and her dedication to DIY principles. She and her mother Ruth Jacbson brought “Mary Jane†to the 1997 Sundance festival, and it was named by Film Threat as one of the “25 Underground Films You Must See.†Sarah was active in the music scene and directed several music videos, including one for Man… or Astroman? She died in 2004 at the age of 32.
After her death, filmmaker Sam Green and Sarah’s mother established the Sarah Jacobson Film Grant for young women “whose work embodies some of the things that Sarah stood for: a fierce DIY approach to filmmaking, a radical social critique, and a thoroughly underground sensibility.†Since 2004, the grant has been awarded to eight filmmakers: Marie Losier, Natasha Mendonca, Kara Herold, Gretchen Hogue, Joanna Dery, Vanessa Renwick, Ellen Lake, and Veronica Majano.
“Ladies and Gentlemen, the Fabulous Sarah Jacobson†will celebrate Sarah’s life and work. It also launches the grant cycle for 2010 and information about applying for the grant will be available at the event and on the Sarah Jacobson Film Grant website.
The evening will begin with a short screening of samples of previous grant winners and two of Sarah’s short films. Filmmaker Barbara Hammer and Sarah’s mother Ruth will then speak and introduce “Mary Jane’s Not a Virgin Any More.†The evening will also include video tributes from Sarah’s fans and friends including Kathleen Hanna, Allison Anders, Tamra Davis, Sam Green, George Kuchar, Michelle Handelman, and Craig Baldwin.
Glasslands is located at 289 Kent Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11211
[L] to Bedford, [J] to Marcy
e-mail to a friend in need
What a rollercoaster of emotions we’re feeling at BG today. We found 
