So much more alluring than Paris Hilton Crack Whore chic.
Posted on 08/31/2006 8:20:15 PM PDT by Coleus
Today’s topic is a tad delicate, so let’s back into it gently.
Last Sunday I found the Emmy Awards in progress in the living room, and sat down to take a look. I was mildly pleased to find them moving along more briskly than in days of yore, and mildly amused at the Bob Newhart subplot (for most of you who were not watching, he was supposedly imprisoned in a Plexiglas cube with only three hours’ worth of air to encourage winners to keep their acceptance speeches short). I found the Dick Clark retrospective mildly touching, and the Aaron Spelling tribute mildly mawkish. But all the while, a distraction was beginning to build, like the buzzing fly that you track with your eyes while zoning in and out of a less than compelling conversation.
The thing is, there were a lot of daring (and even double-daring) necklines being worn by the women moving on and off stage to announce the awards. There were plunging necklines and low-lying necklines and panic-stricken necklines that seemed to be clinging to their owners like grim death.
They weren’t exactly shocking — how could they be, when we’ve all been exposed to much more? And, though I suppose they were arousing the male half of the audience, they naturally weren’t doing anything to me. But they were distracting, drawing my eyes away from the owner’s words and appearance. Instead of responding to this or that starlet’s engaging personality, perky smile, or lame delivery of even lamer jokes, I was compiling a private breast classification system, rating gown décolletage and brooding over who should have worn what or who should have opted for an artfully arranged gossamer scarf or two.
So it occurred to me to wonder how this or that starlet, whether aging like Kate Jackson or dewy-eyed like those young girls whose names I don’t know, would react to my reaction — to being, essentially, reduced to a set of more or less attractive mammary glands. These women were, for the most part, pretty, enthusiastic, elaborately made up, carefully rehearsed, and very hard to focus on or take seriously. There was an Emperor’s New Clothes quality to their performance — that quality of ignoring the obvious rerouting of attention provoked by partially bared breasts.
I have teenaged girls, but even many mothers of elementary school children cringe at what their daughters pick up from the culture about being “hot.” Stroll through the infant and toddler departments in clothing stores as warm weather approaches and check out some of the clothes being marketed for girls in the toddler sizes. You’ll not only find miniskirts that offer a great view of sagging diapers but also see two-piece swim suits where the top is a narrow elastic strip designed, I suppose, to get little girls (and those around them) used to the idea of their strategically baring nearly all, even at an age when there’s nothing significant to bare. There are people who find these offerings cute. Some of them are probably listed in your local sex offender directory.
When you get into this kind of conversation it is very hard not to come off as a prude — a label people largely use nowadays to kill the messenger before the message interferes with life as we know it. In reality, it’s hard to imagine where a real prude would seek sanctuary from the daily onslaught of explicit visuals. But the real damage being inflicted on both girls and boys by society’s bizarrely abnormal attitude toward sex is so great that you wonder how people can realistically dismiss the occasional clear-eyed messenger.
In the end, my small illumination last Sunday evening conveyed a less emotionally charged message than the one I already knew. There were these women on the screen talking to me, trying to tell me things, and I wasn’t paying attention, wasn’t taking them seriously. I wasn’t even being enthralled by beauty; I was being sidetracked by selected body parts.
Don’t these women want to be treated like real human beings? Don’t they want to be respected? Don’t they want to be paid attention to, to be recognized as persons?
And don’t the rest of us want that too?
So much more alluring than Paris Hilton Crack Whore chic.
I'm dissapointed.
4 replies / 80+ views in ~8 min ;>)
Guys have eyes and women have breasticles for a reason. If this chick did not want to see the cleavage she should have done the ADULT thing and changed the channel.
Said writer needs to get over herself and question her subliminal desire to ogle boobies.
"Don’t these women want to be treated like real human beings? Don’t they want to be respected? Don’t they want to be paid attention to, to be recognized as persons?"
They want to make money.
I must agree with the writer of the article--that whether it is overabundant mammary glands staring me in the face (yes, I am a woman) or just a woman with no breasts trying to make a statement themselves such as God given smaller breasts unenhanced can also be quite inviting (which in and of itself is a rebellion fought by few--but in the wrong setting can really just make one a tranny too.)
Many women just completely sexualize themselves these days and whether one is another woman scoping out or rating how successfully the 'competition' is doing this or the men who either turn away in disgust or stand with tongues a hangin', it is pretty impossible to see a complete woman in this day and age and it is 100% up to the woman to both act and dress in a way that makes being both human and attractive possible.
All these girls are brainwashed again by the feminist 'choice' BS. Marketing followed this, not the other way around. Own it you feminist losers from the 60s and 70s (I know there are none on this site). . . own the consequences and results!!!!
My opinion . . . just like Eve in the garden they are and were used by the principality of evil to take us away from God. Pride. HA! Wake up girls and women. Wake up!
End rant :-).
Yeah, if you're into that bizarre "Grandma sure looked hot in her day" kinda thing. Luckily, most of us aren't. Seriously, I find nothing alluring about the younger Bacall. Now Jane Mansfield....grrrrrrrr
Don't be silly. They're in show business.
Turned the thing off and I and my kids watched old Dick Van Dyke reruns on DVD. Thanks again, Hollywood.
They'll all SAY they do, but they sure don't ACT like they do.
I thank the Good Lord that our only daughter never cared for the bare fashions. She just never got into the low slung pants and belly shirts. I just sent her off to college with 3 extremely modest swimsuits, which she picked out herself. They are NOT the full body suits one's mind conjures up with the 'modest' tag. They are high necked and somewhat high backed with 'board shorts' for the bottoms. They are very cute, and she looks great in them. More important, she FEELS comfortable in them, not like she's falling out of them or something.
Nah, they just want the money.
Check out the funbags on those hose monkeys!
Get a load of the cans on those bimbos!
ROTFL!
We're back to worrying about necklines? Geeesh!
"Turned the thing off and I and my kids watched old Dick Van Dyke reruns on DVD. Thanks again, Hollywood."
__________________________________________________________________
You're forgetting that young Mary Tyler Moore caused quite a stir wearing those tight trademark capri pants on the Dick Van Dyke show back in the day.
I was referring to the *clothing style*, not the actress per se.
She was also the "legs" in Peter Gunn.
Said writer needs to get over herself and question her subliminal desire to ogle boobies. >>>>
Today's pop culture is too immoral for children. This is on at a time when too many children are watching. Also, you have to consider for who this woman is writing, Christians. 30 yrs. ago, you would have never seen this sort of thing on national television, it's a variety show and not supposed to be soft porn. Remember Matthew 5?
Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny. 27 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28 But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29
20 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into Gehenna.
30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna.
31 21 "It was also said, 'Whoever divorces his wife must give her a bill of divorce.' 32 But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.