Famous For Nothing (or Misogyny, much?)

A recent episode of WatchMojo featured a top ten list of celebrities that are famous for no reason. What struck me was that the only ones who made the cut were females. A tired trend on a lot of these lists. Search the term ‘famous for nothing,’ and you’ll see countdowns littered with the usual suspects (reality stars, children of celebs) and topped by the mother of them all, Kim Kardashian. A few years ago, I would have nodded my head to the beat and banged the drum in the hater parade, but now, I see two things:

Self-righteous judgment masquerading as promotion of talent and true art. The 2000s ushered in the golden (or dark, depending on who you ask) age of reality TV as well the communication landscape known as social media. Suddenly, reaching thousands or millions of people was not the sole province of the chosen few. ANYONE can cross the threshold from obscurity into celebrity without having to beg permission from the establishment. So what happens? Card carrying members of the elite don’t want to walk red carpets and be named in the same breath with someone who’s most famous for pooping on a flight of stairs. So, the argument goes that reality TV celebrates what’s wrong with America and gives a tremendous platform for foolishness, so the success of any person in that genre makes a mockery of success. Only hard workers and people with discernible gifts (not hood rats and rednecks) get touched by Midas. But that’s what so great about reality TV… it democratizes fame. But this type of notoriety, while the easiest to attain, is tremendously difficult to manage because it requires YOU. When an actor or singer gets criticized, it’s about what they do (or maybe what they wear), something separate from their individual selves. For a reality star, you’re getting railed on for who you are on a regular basis (multiply that through social media and you’ve got a recipe for disaster). This is not a life that many can handle much less maintain for a long time, so some credit is due to those who survive which leads to…

Why all the hate? Especially for women that have managed to make something of themselves in a field littered with burnouts and has-beens? So many of the tirades that mention people who are ‘famous for no reason’ almost NEVER mention men. For all the Kardashian talk, no one seems to remember that Brody Jenner’s fame stems almost entirely from reality TV and his debut (in 2005 with The Princes of Malibu) predates his step-sisters’. But mentioning a few male examples isn’t the point. In our culture, there’s something infuriating about a woman who figures out how to monetize her good looks or charisma or both in a way that increases her capital and status. We get mad about the pretty twenty-something who marries the millionaire; she gets called a gold-digger (he doesn’t get called any names); we roll our eyes and suck our teeth at the size 2 supermodel making thousands per fashion shoot (but give a pass to the (likely male) designer and agent who require she maintain her size to fit the clothes) and we gossip about that cute (and competent) co-worker getting all the attention from the front office (but we’re not questioning the fact that the ones at the top of the chain are all men). Women who succeed at using their feminine wiles turn the system on it’s head because they win at game they’re supposed to lose. They snub the idea that the only time it’s acceptable for a woman to be pretty and charming is in service of a man. They also turn their backs on conventional wisdom about what it means to be ladylike. Are Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton this century’s greatest feminists? I’m not sure, but they’re definitely doing something.

The Duggars Aren’t Honey Boo Boo

The news of Josh Duggar’s past indiscretions as a teenager has saturated the media the past couple of days. There are some who have been calling the family hypocrites and others, Mama June included, who think the show should be cancelled. TLC has responded by pulling the show from its network schedule, but they haven’t quite pulled the plug yet and they shouldn’t. We love to devour people when they make mistakes especially people who have presented themselves as the picture of piety, but what does that do except foster the environment that forces people to hide and lie (and worse) in an effort to keep transgressions under wraps.

What Mama June is too naïve (ignorant?) to understand is that there is typically a comprehension gap between adults and children. Adults are responsible for protecting their children, so June keeping company with a man who molested her daughter is beyond reprehensible and negligent and couldn’t be condoned by the network; on the other hand you have a child who committed a sexual offense over 10 years ago, for which he was not punished through no fault of his own. There is a tremendous difference. The focus shouldn’t be on Josh, who was a minor at the time, who according to the offense report, apologized for his behavior, and, as far as currently known, has not committed any punishable offenses. His story might be one of redemption, and rightfully so. There’s no reason to think that someone at 27 is the same person they were at 14/15.

Instead, focus should be on: the writer of the letter (which detailed the assaults), who instead put pen to paper instead of hand to phone to call police; the discoverer of the letter, who instead of reporting information to authorities, seemed more interested in publicly shaming the family (by asking ‘Oprah’ show runners to confront the Duggars about abuse allegations); the parent(s) of the the fifth victim, who in the report states that they ‘didn’t want to make this into a bigger deal than what it was,’ grossly minimizing what happened to their child and finally and most egregiously, Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar. I’m a parent now and I write this carefully because I don’t want to rain anymore judgement on this family, but like I wrote before, adults are responsible for protecting their children. I shuddered to think about what I and my husband would have to do if faced with similar circumstances.

The pressures to parent effectively, lovingly and unconditionally are daunting in a world that damns you for mistakes, no matter how old. I don’t think that they are terrible people, but they erred in shielding their son from real consequences and not providing him with legitimate counseling; and they sent a message to their daughters that their protection can be nullified under certain conditions. Whether they did so in an honest attempt to protect everyone involved or in an effort to protect the political career of Jim Bob (who was running for Senator at the time) remains to be seen, but I’ll be honest: I’d like to see it. Taking them off TV is no punishment. In no time, all will be forgotten and they’ll be back to living their lives as it once was, surrounded by supporters in their quiet community in Arkansas. Taking the show off the air is cliched and a tired remedy to satisfy those eager for swift justice. Not for me. I would rather them face this music, ON AIR with no place to hide.

Break the Internet…with Porn?

What’s so special about these Kim Kardashian pictures that they’ve been the talk of the town for the past 24 hours? Ok, I’m not blind; I get it; it has that ‘roadside accident that you can’t look away from’ quality to it and it’s supposed to, but doesn’t anyone remember that she already posed nude for W magazine four years ago? It’s the same stunt but less artistic; in Paper, she looks like she showered in Canola; ‘W’ re-imagined her as a living Balloon Venus, painted silver and looking, honestly, quite stunning. Why this magazine thinks a naked woman is earth shattering in 2014 is beyond me, but when’s the last time the publishing industry did something revolutionary?

Fast Acting, Slow Thinking

There’s currently a lot of brouhaha following an op-ed piece in the New York Times about Shonda Rhimes’ tough, black female characters including Viola Davis’ Annalise Keating on ABC’s new drama, How to Get Away With Murder. The negativity surrounding the article comes down two sentences (in a nearly 1,500 word piece): the opening line, “When Shonda Rhimes writes her autobiography, it should be called “How to Get Away With Being an Angry Black Woman” and the real fire-starter,  ‘Ignoring the narrow beauty standards some African-American women are held to, Ms. Rhimes chose a performer who is older, darker-skinned and less classically beautiful than Ms. Washington, or for that matter Halle Berry…” Some have referred to the comments as ‘racist’ and ‘offensive’. I have a feeling they did that without reading the article, but focusing on incendiary tidbits fed to them through the social media machine. I found the whole piece to be flattering (to Rhimes) and truthful (re: Davis). The author, Alessandra Stanley, smartly writes how Rhimes flips the ‘angry black woman’ stereotype on its head, giving us black female characters that seethe out volcanic monologues, but somehow never come across as cliched or playing into tired archetypes; she writes and creates tough and sometimes unlikeable black women without dealing with the societal burden of promoting nice black role models because ‘there’s only so many black characters on TV’. If folks had bothered to read what was written, they would have found the writer stating it more eloquently, “Ms. Rhimes has embraced the trite but persistent caricature of the Angry Black Woman, recast it in her own image and made it enviable. She has almost single-handedly trampled a taboo even Michelle Obama couldn’t break.” As for Ms. Stanley’s point about Viola Davis being “less classically beautiful” than Kerry Washington, she has a point. Let’s not pretend that Hollywood, advertising and magazines don’t have a preference for certain types of beauty that skews lighter and thinner; it is these outlets that have framed our understanding of classic beauty, as well as Ms. Stanley’s. A couple of years ago, when asked why The Help was her first starring role, Davis replied, “There just aren’t a lot of roles for—I mean, I’m a 46-year-old Black actress who doesn’t look like Halle Berry—and Halle Berry is having a hard time.” If Ms. Davis doesn’t have a hard time speaking and facing the truth, why do we?

The Biggest Loser Loses

If you didn’t watch the live finale last night, check the video to get caught up.

 I’m a fairweather fan of the series, watching when there’s an interesting contestant or twist. This season had both with Ruben Studdard (American Idol Season 2 winner) and the theme of second chances, which allowed eliminated players opportunities to get back in the game. However, all of the peaks and valleys of the season were quickly overshadowed when eventual winner, Rachel Fredrickson, revealed her 155lb weight loss, setting a new show record for weight loss percentage at 59.62%. Such a feat would usually be showered with effusive accolades, but this time, this season’s champion looked skeletal and unhealthy, in stark contrast to her fellow contestants. When she made her big entrance, the looks on Jillian and Bob’s (the team trainers) faces said it all; an ‘oh my God’ was clearly visible coming off of Jillian’s lips. Even Allison Sweeney, the show’s host, couldn’t keep the look of concern hidden, quickly switching on a painted grin when Rachel turned to hug her after the big win. The show’s Facebook page was lit up with activity during last night’s finale, many commenting on the possible backlash that might follow TBL if changes aren’t made to ensure that competitors lose weight in a healthy way, perhaps by maintaining an appropriate BMI. In the midst of the controversy, there’s been no comment from the show or trainers outside of the typical congratulations, so I looked forward to the Today show interview with Fredrickson, hoping that they might ask her about the feedback some fans have been giving, but no such luck. I’m not sure what was worse, the possible health issue this woman might be having or the complete lack of journalistic inquiry that the Today show hosts showed; the conversation never veered from compliments and the cliche. I shouldn’t be surprised since the Biggest Loser airs on the same network (NBC) as Today, so they likely wanted to avoid controversy. And in an effort to avoid rocking the boat, NBC, Today and the Biggest Loser missed an opportunity to build interest based on how well they could handle such a sensitive issue opting instead for the ‘company line’ and possible lost viewership.

A Tale of Two Series

I just finished watching the latest episode of Two and a Half Men and I turned off the television and briefly contemplated taking a quick shower to wash it off. I can see why former series regular, Angus T. Jones lambasted the show as ‘filth’. I’m pretty forgiving when it comes to comedy, my only rule: be funny. I watched a man get is taint waxed, a women get drunk over an impending date and a straight man date a transgender female (that’s not the issue; I could care less), BUT IT WASN’T FUNNY. The writers play to the cheap seats, scraping the bottom of the barrel, like their digging for gold, but it’s not good. It’s not groundbreaking. It’s not even risque. It’s desperate. And then, I turned the television back on because Scandal was starting. And it was a good thing because I would have missed Joe Morton (aka Command) in a delicious scene, verbally ripping Fitz (Tony Goldwyn) a new one. It was so entertaining, I broke my promise to my husband to watch it with him. This is what skilled writing is: interesting characters in interesting situations and sometimes the situation doesn’t even matter. The contrast was so stark between the two shows, it startled me into writing for my neglected blog. : ) 

Willow Smith – Summer Fling (Official Music Video) – Talking Points

‘Walk the beach at midnight.’

The dry, blunt cut blond wig.

How old is her love interest?

The British accent.

Lesbians.

Minimum age to have a fling (regardless of season).