Iliza Shlesinger is a stand up comedian from Dallas, Texas. She was the winner of Last Comic Standing 2008 and became the first woman, and youngest, to win. Her witty personality, mixed with vulgar language, has led to “War Paint” (2013) and “Freezing Hot” (2015) on Netflix. Within her two specials. she has four main topics that emphasize the societal problems that women face on a daily basis. These issues may not be stated directly from Shlesinger, or even conscious to her, but they are ever-present.

1. Gender Separation

Throughout the show “Freezing Hot,” Iliza continually refers to how women and men are wired differently. She even states to the audience that “you must act like a lady and not like a guy. We’re [women] just not built like that.” She will constantly say, “For guys….” or “For girls…” This comes up when discussing how men and women perform different acts. This includes conversations, food, and what to do after you have been sexually rejected.

One of the main points of both specials is the idea of how men can do gross things with their penises and women have no recourse…until now. Women are always susceptible to (in her own words) “the agility of your [man] flaccid penis as it slaps in rhythmic repetition against either one of your clearly never seen by the sun thighs…” But for Iliza, she has created, “Raptor-Vag”. This is a way to instill fear onto men as being susceptible to raptor-vag from women. It’s only fair, right?

2. Dependence vs. Power

While Iliza talks about the separation between the genetic makeup of men and women, she also refers to how women are dependent on a man, but hold the upper hand in power. One example of how women are dependent on the man is when it comes to the weather. They look to the man to know the weather, as well as what outer-layer to put on depending on the weather. She also goes to say that you must always have one guy friend with you when you go out because he will always find the car (even though who takes a car to the bar?). Men have a better tracking system than females. Women do not take the responsibility to see where they parked the car. Do not rely on girl GPS!

When it comes to power, the female holds a lot of power in the relationship. One of the simplest ways that a woman shows her power is through something that every girl does. And that is Pinterest. Women will go above and beyond to plan their future wedding or any other significant event in their life. Another way that women show their power, is by playing off of a mans vulnerability. When a man is weak, perhaps he just broke up with his girlfriend and looking for another girl, a girl will become the “evil witch” and lure him by telling him enticing lies. By doing so, they know that they are able to hook the guy into being interested in them. Another main point found is that women will start a fight to see if the man thought he started the fight. They want to make sure that their “powers” are still strong.

Women have always been considered the gatherers of the groups, while men are the hunters. Iliza sees it as women gather information to hunt for men. The bars are their hunting grounds.

                               

3. Girl Logic

“It’s a contradiction wrapped in a bow; pretty; glitter.” This is how Iliza explains girl logic. Basically, she is saying that “wanting what you can’t have or wanting the one thing that you want, but not wanting whatever makes that thing a thing.” Throughout the specials, there is constant references to girl logic. A lot of these references are based on the experiences of her girlfriends. She goes into how society can play a role in how women act. She states that women have always been accused of being feeble-minded, and occasionally they will play into that to get something. In addition, women are known to send mixed messages. They won’t tell you why they are mad, but they expect you to know. They can create conflict, were there was none. A fact that Iliza had thrown out was that 90% of activities that girls engage in revolve around getting a guys attention. Girls will lie if they want to impress a guy.

4. Media Corruption

In both series, Iliza talks of the impacts that media has on female appearance. Iliza is convinced that society operates on the currency of insecurities. She feels that women have too many options for weight loss. She states that most women magazines will send a negative message through their ads “Make them feel like their bodies are unacceptable and sell them some shit.” “You’re amazing, but you need to lose ten pounds.” “Love your body, love your hair; whatever you have been doing is wrong.” They want you to accept yourself, but then give you diet tips because, well, you may be overweight. While it may be true for men as well, magazines are promoting for a different type of image. For men, they want to portray the image of rock hard abs and an absolute jacked physique. They may tell you how to lose some weight, but sell you products to help you gain weight in muscle.

In addition to weight loss issues found in media, Iliza makes it clear that most products sold today (mainly make-up products) send a mixed message with a whorey undertone. She uses the example of an eyeliner called “Bad Gal” as well as blush called “Flirty Girl.” To her, the problem is not that it is a mixed message, but that there is a negative message and men reap a positive effect. “Oh she’s a bad gal, maybe she’ll touch my D.” But through observation, she has noticed that there are no mens products available where women reap a positive effect.

—————————————————————————————————————————————-

After watching Shlesinger’s two specials, one may wonder if Iliza considers herself a feminist? Her shows are about the female gender and she is all for defending girls against society? In terms of feminism, Iliza Shlesinger doesn’t care if you think she is a feminist or not. She is only cares to make you laugh. “She’s not socially conscious, she makes sweeping and unflattering generalizations about her female friends, and she paints an unsettling commentary on dating for women.” (http://thelaughbutton.com/features/iliza-shlesinger-battles-political-correctness-social-conventions-war-paint-review/)

Another question that may be posed is what other females, especially feminist, think about her? In an interview Split Sider, Shlesinger was asked about fear of backlash from other women, especially feminist about her naked cover for “War Paint”. Her response:

I was not afraid of that, because part of what we [comedians] do is put it out there and not apologize about it. It isn’t that I’ve offended someone or said something horrible and Being a feminist is all about keeping things equal and people are allowed to… why not use whatever assets you have. I happen to be in shape. As a woman you should be proud of that. I think we live in a society where women are told to be thin and be in shape, but the second you are, don’t flaunt it, because you’ll make other people insecure. I just don’t subscribe to that. I was raised in a house where I never heard my mom talk bad about other women. It was always, “Ah! Look at her, she’s so beautiful.” “Look at her hair. It’s so amazing.” My mom never called anyone a bitch, so you know I grew up admiring other women for being attractive or for being funny or smart and not being jealous. Obviously we all get jealous, it’s a human thing. So, what I’d say to anyone is if that cover bothers you you’re going to need to look inside and think why that bothers you, because it’s not on me. (http://splitsider.com/2015/01/iliza-shlesinger-and-the-contradictions-of-freezing-hot/)

Iliza Shlesinger is a “confident, independent women who listens to Beyoncé, surfboard” and is not afraid to say what she wants to say.To some her content may be a little vulgar and offensive, but to others its just the facts of life. Women live in a society where there is constant judgement, but men are harshly judged by society as well. In my opinion, she does not represent a high feminist figure and is not promoting a feminist movement. She is merely doing her job, which is to make you laugh. Her material is created to be relatable to the audience. She employs a nasally, baby voice to mimic a certain type of woman, ” a young, somewhat vacuous singleton.” She does this to make it relatable; not to make fun. “Everyone thinks the world is out to get them; people need to lighten up and have a laugh.”

When I first saw the title of “Girls Chase Boys” by Ingrid Michaelson, I was somewhat disappointed because the title seemed to generalize about people’s sexuality as heterosexuality. However, as I watched the music video and read interviews of the artist, I realized that I was very wrong. Ingrid Michaelson edited the original lyrics written by other writers, which were limited to heterosexuality, to embrace all forms of love. In addition to the lyrics, the singer-songwriter came up with an idea of making the music video inclusive of everyone regardless of race or gender as opposed to a music video by Robert Palmer that her video was an homage to.

According to on her Facebook page (refer to the post below), “Girls Chase Boys” was meant to be a breakup song at first, but as the artist continued writing, her focus shifted to describe the idea that “no matter who or how we love, we are all the same.” Certain parts of the lyrics emphasize such points by being repeated – each chorus and each verse are identical (refer to the lyrics at the end). “Let’s not make it harder than it has to be. Oh it’s all the same thing,” which comes after “all the broken hearts in the world still beat,” criticizes discrimination against the LGBTQ community, in which people undergo difficult times personally as non-LGBTQ people do such as breakups, death of close ones, national crises, and economic downturns. Also, although this part of the lyrics is not included on some lyrics webpages, if you listen closely, you can hear

“Girls chase boys chase girls

chase girls chase boys chase boys chase girls,”

(around 1:24 and 2:14 in the first music video), and only this part of the lyrics is spelled out on the screen of the music video. In my opinion, this emphasis clearly describes the singer’s not only openness, but also belief in the importance of embracing different paradigms of courtship.

The music video by Ingrid Michaelson is an homage to “Simply Irresistible” by Robert Palmer, which was released in 1988. In the original music video by Robert Palmer (the second video below), there is no non-white or male dancer. The white female dancers are also overly sexualized: 1) they wear tight dresses and the camera zooms in on their breasts and hips, 2) they dance as the water pours on them, and 3) they thrust on each other (1:03) and move in a very seductive way (1:31). I believe these are some of ways of depicting women in a stereotypical way that perpetuates body image and gender norms (i.e. women should be slender and dress in a stereotypically feminine way such as wearing make-up and dresses). In contrast, the music video by Ingrid Michaelson sexualizes female as well as male dancers equally. Especially, the male dancers possess both stereotypical traits of femininity and masculinity by having thick make-up and emphasizing their crotch (0:51), chest hair (2:06), and muscles (2:15), respectively. In addition, dancers thrust on each other regardless of the gender (1:35 – 1:41), which supports the main point of the song. It is fascinating how Ingrid Michaelson’s music video not only breaks gender roles and gender identities by expressing such femininities and masculinities in the male dancers, but also portrays both women and men in a very attractive way equally – as an Upworthy article describes, “it’s sexual without being sexiest”.

 

 

As opposed to before 2010s when there were a few states where same-sex marriage was legal and when the society did not pay much attention to consequences of gender norms, such as stress, bullying, and harassment caused by deviating from body image and gender roles, there has been a shift in the attention of at least some people as the media (Time, The Fosters by ABC Family, The Hunger Games, Buzzfeed, etc.) recently started paying more attention to such issues. I believe “Girls Chase Boys” by Ingrid Michaelson supports and reflects such shifts in the media, which has room for improvement in terms of embracing gender deviance.

 

Lyrics to “Girls Chase Boys” by Ingrid Michaelson

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Ooooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Ooooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

I’m a little let down, but I’m not dead
There’s a little bit more that has to be said (Oh oooh)
You play me, now I play you too
Lets just call it over

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Oooooh its all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Oooooh its all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls
Chase girls chase boys chase boys chase girls

Im a little bit home, but I’m not there yet
Its one to forgive but its hard to forget
Don’t call me, I won’t call you, too
Lets just call it over

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Oooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Oooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls
Chase girls chase boys chase boys chase girls

I got two hands, one beating heart
And I’ll be alright, I’m gonna be alright

Yeah I got two hands, one beating heart
And I’ll be alright,
Gonna be alright

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Oooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Oooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Oooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

All the broken hearts in the world still beat
Lets not make it harder than it has to be
Oooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

Oooooh it’s all the same thing
Girls chase boys chase girls

from https://play.google.com/music/preview/Teasyz4atgl6frgouh7p5u2xfie?lyrics=1&utm_source=google&utm_medium=search&utm_campaign=lyrics&pcampaignid=kp-lyrics

Raised from birth as Catholic, I spent many of my Sundays and countless days in between learning lessons of morality and spiritual purity. Sitting in the pew before the start of Mass, I often observed the statue of the Virgin Mary, the epitome of feminine perfection—chaste and reserved. During an all-female retreat for catechism, I learned that virginity is a gift, which women must protect solely for the enjoyment of their husbands. I still recall the lesson in which the instructor explained that a part of you forever remains with the first man with whom you have sex. So I lose a part of myself when I have sex? The Church, of course, only explained the virtues of feminine virginity within a heteronormative context. The concept of virginity, especially the notion that I may lose a part of who I am to a man during sex, left me with the question of why having sex was such a definitive moment of life. Why does society attempt to define when a woman may utilize her body for sexual purposes? And why does a woman’s decision of if, when and with whom to have sex determine her worth?

The preservation of feminine virginity until marriage is one method with which patriarchal society attempts to stifle female empowerment and sexual expression. Traditionally within the home, husbands and children looked to the mother for moral guidance. Thus, men understood the successful preservation of virginity as indicative of future wifely success—similar to how admissions boards rely on SAT scores to predict student success in college. Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s novel, Chronicle of a Death Foretold, demonstrates the profound importance for women to protect their virginity as it is the ultimate indicator of feminine morality. The narrative chronicles the events surrounding the murder of Santiago Nasar, a young man who is thought to have taken the virginity of Angela Vicario, an unmarried woman. When Angela’s new husband discovers that she is not a virgin, her husband returns her to the house of her parents, reducing her to a “fallen woman”. Though, arguably, Angela does a ‘moral thing’ by telling her husband the truth and not lying about her past sexual experiences, her husband fails to recognize her honesty as an indicator of morality. Evidently, Angela Vicario’s worth as a wife and a person lay between her legs. Following her social demise, Angela submits herself to a life of menial labor and pining for her absent husband. Thus within the context of patriarchal society, virginity remains the only object of worth that a woman may give to her husband.

The idolization of virginity as equitable to women’s morality renders all accomplishments, ideas and other values that women bring to society, void. Society’s emphasis on virginity makes if, with whom, and when a woman has sex the main and only concern. However, I believe that a woman’s decision to have sex before or after marriage does not determine who you are as a person or how good you are.

In the video and book, “The Purity Myth,” the media’s portrayal of sexy, single, female celebrities declaring their commitment to abstinence demonstrates the relationship that exists between virginity and morality in society. American society praised celebrities such as Britney Spears and Miley Cyrus who proudly declared their virginity to the public. Within the context of patriarchal society, the two ladies’ proclamation of sexual purity increased their moral worth and their worth as women. As the narrator of the video assertively states, American society and media (though not exclusively America) “leads women to believe that their moral compass lies somewhere between their legs.” This notion drastically sets back the feminist movement because it reduces women to sex objects. It does not take into account other attributes, which make someone a good person.

Even from a young age, society teaches girls that in order to be moral, they must preserve their virginity until marriage. This emphasis on virginity reduces young girls to potential sex objects, especially by promoting the fashion of purity rings – physical indicators of sexual purity. Girls may as well wear a sign that reads “I am the ultimate object of male desire.” Shortly after receiving my confirmation, I received a purity ring and was told to pledge my virginity to God. I was told upon receiving the purity ring that I had to wear it until I swapped it for a wedding ring—the one ring to rule them all. In other words, I had to wait until a man chose to marry me before I could have sex. This took away my power to make my own decisions regarding my sex life. Taking away a woman’s ability to make decisions pertaining to her sex life encourages submissiveness and reinforces the traditional gender role of female servitude in the household. As I grew older, I began to perceive that my innate worth was tied to the preservation of my virginity. This idea, I have since relinquished. The purity balls, which the video and book describe, illustrate society’s early attempts to brainwash adolescent girls and initiate them into the “cult of virginity.” During these balls, girls deck white dresses to symbolize their sexual purity and pledge their virginity to their father. The young girl’s pledge of virginity to their father until marriage is reminiscent of the literal transfer of property rights from a father’s household to a husbands, which popularly existed up until the last century in western countries. Female sexuality is thus commoditized as a girl who has had sex, such as Angela Vicario, can be seen as “damaged goods.”

To take the necessary step in the direction towards social equality, young girls should be taught how to recognize their accomplishments, personalities and ideas as objects of worth, not whether or not they waited until marriage to have sex. Women must be able to fully control their ability to choose if, when, or with whom to have sex, without society instructing them on the proper choice or designating a moral value to it. With the power to choose how to utilize one’s body, comes true equality. Women are worth more than their virginity.

Márquez, Gabriel García. Chronicle of a Death Foretold. New York: Knopf, 1983. Prin

Growing up with lesbian mothers, I have observed a dramatic shift in how my peers and society has perceived the LGBT community in my lifetime.  People who  would make rude homophobic comments in the hallway are now changing their facebook backgrounds to rainbow flags and collecting gay best friends like they did  pokemon cards in 2001. While this new shift in acceptance of the LGBT community is welcome, with it has come a commodification of gay culture.  Film and television industries have strayed from the Hays code when depicting gay characters, and presented audiences with ‘the gay best friend’ character.  This (almost exclusively male) flamboyant, sexually liberated teen serves as a source of outspoken sass and comedic relief in any scene. The character, based off stereotypes of gay men, are the main sources of LGBT representation in media.  While the character is meant to be a progressive light in media, it portrays homosexuality as two dimensional, and sexuality that can be tied in a pretty box and present to bring laughs to others. There lacks a mainstream franchise directed to a youth audience that focuses on questions of sexuality without relying on (sometimes very offensive) stereotypes. This caricature of a the LGBT community has pushed the recent view of homosexuality to be a ‘trendy’ fashion accessory.

The new MTV series Faking It is a modern romantic comedy that reflects recent social shifts recognizing the LGBT community in media. The show focuses on two best friends, Amy and Karma, who are mistaken for a lesbian couple by a popular boy at school who is “craving lesbian energy”, and instantly become school celebrities.  Karma, desperate to be popular, begs Amy to play along; only for Amy to realize that she does, in fact like girls and is in love with Karma. Love triangles aside, the series pokes fun at the social trend that places the purpose of a  gay friend as analogous to a   fashionable new pair of shoes, and the common misconceptions of gender and sexuality that have emerged with the new perceptions of the LGBT community. The show provides a new perspective on female friendship and sexuality in a high school setting that usually follows solid gender roles. While Faking It is filled with endless topics of regarding gender, I chose to focus on the relationship between Amy and her step-sister, Lauren. The two sisters, one intersex and the other gay, question the traditional conceptions of what it means to be feminine. The characters disregard the heterosexual matrix and  illustrate that femininity within gender expression and identification are separate and unrelated to biological sex and sexual orientation.

WARNING- SEASON 2 SPOILERS AHEAD

Amy Rautenfeld and Lauren Cooper highlight that femininity is independent of sex and orientation. Amy, recognized as a   ‘butch’ lesbian by her peers, is  juxtaposed to her step-sister Lauren Cooper, a hyper- sexual, intersex beauty queen.  When traditional indicators of femininity (as set by the heterosexual matrix), are abandoned, the sisters form their identities as women separate from their biological and sexual gender expectations.

In season 2, Faking It reveals that Lauren is intersex- raising questions of the character’s sexuality and gender expression. Lauren Cooper’s intersex biological gender causes  her to question how others with perceive her identity as a woman. Intersex individuals are born with both male and female biological characteristics and results in a physical gender ambiguity at birth. In Faking It, Lauren (and her family) chose to identify as a girl; but in reality, intersex individuals can, and have, identified as female, male, neither, and change gender identity throughout the course of one’s life. Here is some basic background of intersex biology here and a nifty diagram explaining the relationship between gender identity, expression, and biology here that I feel the television show attempts to illustrate.

Lauren’s character has been applauded over social media and media outlets alike for normalizing a group of people that rarely are brought to the mass attention . Personally, I did not know what it meant to be intersex until watching Faking It , and had to do a quick wikipedia search during a commercial break in efforts to understand what was going on. The television brings attention to a population usually ignored, while clarifying that, despite common misconception, that intersex individuals can  clearly identify with a gender.

Lauren’s intersex biological gender brings attention to the difference between gender identity/expression and biological sex. Lauren gender expression represents the ideals of femininity as spelled out by a typical high school rom-com: beauty queen, popular, blond, with a faithful posse. This character is the archetype of a cool girl that can be seen in any John Hughes movie or Molly Ringwald character , and Lauren prides herself on her identity as this popular girl. But being intersex, Lauren’s questions her identity as a women as defined by the heterosexual matrix. The biological gender ambiguity leaves no clear gender identification and Lauren fears others will believe that her biological sex is a determinant of her femininity. There is a clear separation between the character’s biology and her outward expression of her gender- proving that biology and gender identification/expression are separate entities.  This character illustrates traditional forms of femininity can be exhibited in individuals who are not born female- gender identification and express are independent from biological gender.

.

Faking It attempts to fill the much needed gap for lesbian representation in media, exploring how Amy discovers her sexuality and her own identity as a woman. Amy is identified as a ‘butch’ lesbian (for no reason, that I can see, other than her tendency to wear plaid). This label of a ‘butch’  is  built upon the concept that even in same-sex relationships, one partner is the ‘male’ and the other is the ‘female’ of the two. The idea simplifies both heterosexual and homosexual relationships by implying that same sex  relationships are just a reflection of heterosexual relationships- a masculine and feminine half is needed. This concept  is consistently presented within the series, and the ridiculousness of this presumption is recognized through humor. The question of whether femininity can present itself in an individual  is perceived as a masculine is presented.Amy does not identify with this stereotype, and rejects it by entering a beauty pageant and attempts to win it just to prove she can.  The hyper-sexual beauty as a form of feminity can exist even with gay women. Sexual orientation  of a woman does not cripple her from performing feminine attributes. The character ignores her categorization, and recognized her femininity.

Amy and Lauren are juxtaposed as a gay cis-gender female and a intersex, female identifying, straight individual. While the sisters’ personalities are different, both struggle with a their sexual identity. This presents a classic ‘coming of age’ dilemma with gender and sex, broadcasting that these identities are not as simple and uniform as mass media presents it to be. Faking It illustrates that gay and sexual discovery can exist outside of  the stereotypical  ‘Gay Best Friend’’.

What I find so interesting about this series, is that it takes place in a high school setting; and with it the expectations of girlhood as brought up in the magical girl series is brought to mind. But the series uses this setting as an outlet to question the social norms that are expected of high school students and exposes the audience (of what I presume to be mostly younger viewers) to a new exploration of sexuality and gender. The show broadcasts rarely advertised ideas of gender nationwide to audiences that may have not been exposed to it otherwise. New ideas of gender and sexuality are normalized and are illustrated through characters that represent a wide spread of individuals. Homosexuality is not isolated to the drag shows of NYC, but is prevalent in suburbs, cities, with religious individuals, republicans, and democrats alike. The sisters reaffirm Judith Butler’s gender matrix is incorrect; femininity is not a sole result of being born with female sex organs and being sexually attracted to men. The show exposes that sexuality and gender are diverse, and highlights that despite that uniform LGBT representation in television, there is no cookie cutter mold for sexuality.

There is a lack of lack of lesbian  and intersex representation on television;  Faking It attempts to fulfill this much needed gap for sexuality and gender diversity. Typically, media simplifies diversity by only broadcasting the ‘gay best friend’ character as LGBT representation.  In reality, sexuality and gender are not crisply packaged, tied up, and placed in neatly categorized boxes. The television show illustrates how messy gender, femininity, and sexuality is. Neither of the girls follow ‘traditional’ (whatever that means) forms of femininity and gender, and highlight that this ‘traditional’ path is not mandatory. While Faking It has it’s faults (can we really expect anything from MTV to be perfect?), the television show succeeds in exposing individuals to the sexual diversity and the acceptance within our broad American society.

In the upcoming film Trainwreck, written by and starring Amy Schumer, Amy does not believe in monogamy and instead partakes in a lifestyle of one night stands. She is also a strong independent woman who does not need a man to save her from her immoral ways. In fact, when she is faced with the chance of finding love, she shies away from it because the idea is that foreign to her. While her social life is not perfect and could be seen as sloppy at the worst, she is not portrayed as a slut.

So what does this mean for a movie to illustrate a woman’s sexuality without the consequences associated with promiscuity like in the movies Knocked Up (becomes pregnant after a one night stand) and Pretty Women (literally a prostitute)? Well first, it strips away the slut stigma given to women who choose to explore their sexual freedom instead of waiting for “the one”. Instead of slut shaming Amy, the movie pokes fun at her lifestyle with bad one night stands and her uncaring attitude towards the infamous walk of shame. It also completely ignores the abstinence only sex education I received in the deep south, where girls should live in constant fear of becoming emotionally attached to every man they sleep with, nasty STDs and the ever present chance of becoming pregnant. Amy powers through men fearlessly and she is able to create a dissociation from a guy after sleeping with him. This further emphasizes that the only thing Amy is gaining from her one night stands is pure self absorbing pleasure. She is doing this solely for herself and her own wants, not to satisfy a man’s needs but to satisfy her carnal sexual appetite.

Furthermore, Amy’s promiscuous ways do not commend her to a life of being a single slut. Amy is not cast aside because she is “used” or “dirty”. In fact, after sleeping with a guy who must know she indulges in one night stands, he wants to see her again because he does not care what she does with her body in her spare time. Totally shattering the notion that guys only want “pure” girls and that if you sleep around you will gain a reputation of being a whore. It’s almost as if a woman should be free to whatever she wants to do with her body without being shamed by social or religious constructs.

Hopefully more movies will trend towards depicting women owning their sexuality and away from slut shaming. Allowing for social constructs to reflect this change in ideology towards the way women use their body and who can or cannot judge them.

Few films this past year have contested the notion of gender binarism, or the classification of sex and gender into two distinct and opposite forms of masculinity and femininity, as did the science-fiction film Predestination by the Spierig brothers. To the viewer’s surprise, Predestination is not a generic time-travel action flick geared toward massive audiences, but rather, it offers a narration of an individual born with an intersex condition who reveals his unique identity of having secondary sexual characteristics within the same body. Through illustrating the lived experiences of the protagonist, named the Unmarried Mother, Predestination explores the concepts of intersexuality, gender identity and gender fluidity that traditional films on the big screen tend to avoid.

The film begins with a young man (played by Sarah Snook) speaking to a bartender (Ethan Hawke) in 1970 about his younger self as a girl. He is called “the Unmarried Mother”, because he writes stories for confession magazines, many of them from the viewpoint of an unmarried mother. When asked why he understands the female perspective so well, the Unmarried Mother reveals that he was born a girl in 1945 and raised in an orphanage. In 1963, he was seduced, impregnated, and abandoned by an older man (who is later revealed to be a future version of himself during his employment at the Temporal Bureau, an organization that sends agents in different time periods to resolve conflicts. During complications in the delivery of her child, doctors discovered she had an intersex condition— that is, she has both male and female reproductive organs in the body—which forced them to give her a sex change to save her life. The now-former girl, having to adjust being a man, is disqualified from his previous position as a female space worker, which inspires him to take on writing confession stories as a profession. After hearing his story, the enlightened bartender offers the Unmarried Mother the opportunity to revisit the past, changing the course of history in the process.

Predestination is a highly entertaining film that succeeds in grappling the viewer’s attention. Its plot, however, is even more intriguing in the sense that it does not perpetuate the classic notion of gender binaries (Sarah Snook could have been casted and remained a female protagonist, or even replaced with another actor during her subsequent male scenes by the film directors) but takes its time to originate, cultivate, and deliver the needed story of the transgendered character to establish his motives which are crucial for the remainder of the movie. Too few large-scale movies with A-list actors have accomplished this feat without fear of losing attraction of their audience.

For Predestination, there is no such conflict: the movie liberates Hollywood’s rigid gender structures to offer viewers a thoughtful story that instills the idea of people who are human first, transgendered second.

Who are these people and how do they know so much about Korean beauty standards? EatYourKimchi is a relatively popular site where Simon and Martina, a Canadian couple who have moved to South Korea in 2008. In this video, they discussed about the normalized conventionality of South Korean beauty standards and the somewhat unrealistic expectations that are created from these ideals. South Koreans have a very strict standard of what is considered beautiful.

Female celebrity actresses have to have pale and impeccable skin, big double eyelids, and a V-lined face. A relatively famous Korean girl group named Girl’s Generation epitomizes these features. One of the members, Yoona, is considered to be one of the most beautiful women in South Korea. In addition to embodying the attributes mentioned above, she is skinny to the point of anorexic, with long legs; her ridiculous proportions resemble an Asian barbie doll.

In fact, this trend of being beautiful is not only limited to girls, but also pertains to guys. This photo is a picture of Taemin, a very  popular group singer in the group SHINEE.

Here are several photos of him in girl’s clothing, where he resembles a very femme image. First, his face is, with big wide eyes, a high nose and plump lips. His physique is also very frail, weak and extremely skinny. SHINEE remains one of the most popular groups in South Korea. Why? SHINEE fans say that they are attracted to these conventionally feminine features of Taemin and in reality; Taemin reverses presumed gender dynamics of visual pleasure. What does this say about gender expectations in South Korea? Is South Korea a harbinger in breaking traditional gender stereotypes or are they just implementing yet another bias that will pressure conformity?

Due to the recent digitalization of South Korea and the commercialization of beauty as a competitive advantage, many high school graduates in South Korea ask for double eyelids and nose jobs. This publicity for plastic surgery “has the effect of reinforcing the commodification of female beauty as the ‘trophy’ for the successful male.”[1] The commercialization of cosmetic surgery reinforces a normalized standard of beauty, resulting in the rising trend of plastic surgery for men also (add picture of plastic surgery in men). Even though plastic surgery for men is not as prevalent as it is for women, Korean men still crave to fit themselves into the normal standard of being beautiful. A 2010 study done by The Korean Association for Plastic Surgeons estimates that “44 percent of male college students were contemplating some form of aesthetic surgery.”[2] These statistics demonstrate that there is a significant amount of Korean men who further want to change their physical features to look more ‘beautiful.’

When did this feminized notion of masculinity slowly prevail over Korean popular culture? How do we even define masculinity and femininity in South Korea? I believe that these conventions are mainly due to the impact of the media; they are trying to instill a feminine stereotype for both South Korean men and women. The South Korean entertainment industry demonstrates the impact of femininity across gender conventions. This androgynous feature that is emphasized in Korean boy bands question the hypocrisy and irony of the conservative nature of South Korean society. If South Korea were genuinely conservative, they would still abide by the conventional gender conventions, not underline the prettiness in boy bands. In one way, the media helped break the conventional notion of what should be masculine and feminine, however, they have yet to give autonomy to the South Korean people to decide what they deem as beautiful.

[1] Davies, G., & Han, G.-S. (2011, November). Korean cosmetic surgery and digital publicity: beauty by Korean design. Media International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, (141), 146+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA275130667&v=2.1&u=nysl_sc_cornl&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=26c023e74746aaa7775e4c6222e2dd89

[2] Holiday&Hauang (2012, June). Gender, Globalization and Aesthetic Surgery in South Korea. Sage Journals. Body&Society. http://bod.sagepub.com/content/18/2/58

I am a huge fan of Ted Talks. It might be that they let me learn about things I would otherwise never had the chance to or maybe I just feel smarter when experts in their field talk at a level I can understand. Whatever the reason, I try to watch or listen to a couple of them a week. There was one talk in particular that I watched a couple months ago that I thought was interesting but had forgot about until taking this class: “Violence against women – it’s a men’s issue” by Jackson Katz. I had forgotten about it because at the time I thought it wasn’t very relevant to me. It was only after taking this class that I realize it is relevant to everyone.

When I say it is relevant to everyone, I don’t mean that all men have had trouble with violence against women personally. I just did not know how close I was to the problem. Growing up, violence against and disrespecting women was just something that I would hear jackasses on the news getting in trouble for. It wasn’t until I came to Cornell that I started to realize what a problem it was. I played a varsity sport and was president of my fraternity for a year, so I am very familiar with the two institutions that are the biggest culprits (or at least get the most attention) of violence against women. I realized that the administration’s way of handling things that cause problems is the “cover our own ass” technique. Whether it be outlawing kegs at parties (we will just buy more cases?) to curb aggressive drinking or lowering the standard of proof from “clear and convincing evidence” to “preponderance of the evidence” to deal with sexual assault cases, I do not believe the administration is dealing with the heart of the problem, nor do I believe they are capable of doing so.

I think it is safe to say that the Greek system plays a huge role at Cornell. It would be impossible to go here for four years and not come into contact with someone that is a fraternity or sorority. This overwhelming presence is a contributing factor to the problems that the Greek community has had with violence against women. In his talk, Katz mentions one of the ways that the dominant group can continue to perpetuate its culture is by never being challenged. He specifically says,

“This is one of the ways that dominant systems maintain and reproduce themselves, which is to say the dominant group is rarely challenged to even think about its dominance, because that’s one of the key characteristics of power and privilege, the ability to go unexamined, lacking introspection, in fact being rendered invisible in large measure in the discourse about issues that are primarily about us.”

The Greek system, specifically fraternities, has never been challenged on their attitudes and beliefs about women. Sure, there have been mandatory quizzes and events that members are required to attend, each with the purpose of educating men on violence against women. Most of the quizzes are clicked through aimlessly until the end, while the events are spent day dreaming about something else. No one has confronted the system head on saying, “it is on you that these things happen.” There has been no real attempt to institute, what Katz calls, the bystander approach, which I believe is the solution to this problem.

The bystander approach is essentially authoritative adults standing up and confronting the issue at hand. This is where I disagree with Katz a bit. I do not think it has to be adults with authority; it can be anyone with some type of influence over another. It can be leaders in the Greek community and in their respective fraternities or even as simple as not letting a friend get away with a joke. I accept the responsibility that comes with my position. Violence against women is a men’s issue. It is our issue.

From Saturday Night Live on February 28th, 2015.

 

Context on Kara Walker’s “A Subtlety”:

“In late spring of 2014, Creative Time presented the first large-scale public project by Kara Walker, one of the most important artists of our era. Sited in the sprawling industrial relics of Brooklyn’s legendary Domino Sugar Factory, Walker’s physically and conceptually expansive installation—a massive, sugar-coated sphinx-like woman—responded to the building and its history.”

It’s quite astounding to me just how many people missed the point of Kara Walker’s A Subtlety or the Marvelous Sugar Baby. A commentary on the sugar cane trade and a feminist/racial critique on the objection of black female bodies through the Mammy stereotype, the art piece was meant to stand (or rather, bend over) as a visual representation of body politics. Yet, we have Instagrammers who violate the sculpture by taking and posting photos objectifying the female body.