[IR] Spanx: The Modern-Day Cape for Super Women

We live in a day and age where mini skirts and bandeau bras are the center of controversy when it comes to discussing how clothing aids in the objectification of women.  According to the endless advertisements we see on a daily basis, everything is about what's on the outside.  Of course, any person with an ounce of respect for what's on the inside of a person is able to recognize that personality and actions are much more valuable than what others see physically.  But what happens when a layer in between the outside and the in is introduced?  What's above the heart but below the skimpy dress (or conservative dress)?  That's right, I'm talking about Spanx.

If you don't know what Spanx are (and therefore are most likely of the male gender), let me educate you for a moment.  Spanx are a line of underwear (bras, slips, tights, and undies) that are designed to squeeze your muffin tops and chub rolls so that they are less... noticeable.  The inventor of Spanx spent a mere $5,000 on investment when creating the product and is now the youngest female self-made billionaire in the world.  This fact shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who knows the sneaky tricks and overall popularity of Spanx.  Teenagers and aged women alike are drawn to Spanx like Pooh to a honey pot.  The question is whether or not these underwear products are anti-progressive in the feminist movement.  Orit Avishai seems to think so, and I would like to challenge her stance against Spanx.

As a notably overweight teenage girl, I can confidently say that I am no stranger to seeing "unsightly rolls" when I look in the mirror.  It's whatever, really, I'm cool with the extra chub here and there.  By no means am I not self conscious about my looks (what girl isn't self conscious, let's be honest) but I have refused to let my appearance determine my own self worth, which is why I can profess my love for shapewear and tell you that this is not a result of my desire to mask my own insecurities.  This goes along with my FIRM belief that most girls do not purchase nor wear certain clothing because they think it will attract boys, but rather because it makes them feel confident in their own skin.  This is parallel to the use of makeup; most often, a girl wears concealer and eyeliner and blush because it brings out the beauty that is already on her face.  Both makeup and shapewear, in my opinion, serve as enhancers of natural beauty, not camouflagers.  

People who would challenge the idea of being confident wearing certain clothing for the sake of just being happy are clearly not aware of the line that is drawn between being a certain way for someone else and being a certain way for oneself.  You know how I know I'm not gaining confidence from my Spanx through the belief that it will make me more attractive boys?  First of all, boys are hardly ever the first thing on my mind.  Don't get me wrong, I'm still a teenage girl with an interest in cute boys every once and a while, but what I put on in the morning is for me, not anyone else.  Another reason is because I would wear Spanx to bed (ergo in absolute solitude) if it wouldn't feel so strange wearing shaping tights under my pajama pants.  In the end, if a girl puts on a pair of Spanx and is able to look in the mirror and say, "Damn, I look good" without even thinking about what a boy will think when he sees such a sight, then for goodness sake, let her be empowered by the way she looks.

Article: http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/08/opinion/avishai-spanx-women/index.html

[TA] How the Objectification of Women and The Citric Acid Cycle are Related

Let me tell you something right off the bat: I love slam poetry.  Actually, scratch that-- I am nothing less than obsessed with slam poetry.  I felt like a kid on Christmas when I saw how many of my optional topics of conversation were centered around slam poetry (God bless you, Ms. Pyle).  I've seen a lot of the options before, and I was so glad to see one of my favorites on the list: The four girls in the BNV Finals in Washington D.C.

The fact that the performers were four very young, well-spoken girls was empowering in itself.  To see girls my age saying something that so many women recognize is important but don't have the time, courage or eloquence to say is so inspiring.  I am giving each of them a big spiritual "ROCK ON," I assure you.  There is also a noticeably unique effect in the fact that these four girls are so culturally and ethnically diverse.  It shows that young girls of any background can agree on something big.  The most important thing you can take from the performed poem is that girls that cover up are not worthy of judgement or objectification.  Hold on, I'm not done.  The women who are scantily clad and make spend most of their time working in a strip club are not worthy of judgement or objectification either.  The POINT is that a woman dress however she wants to dress, act however she wants to act, and say whatever she wants to say as long as it is HER CHOICE.  By no means am I saying that women should not show off their chest or their butt or their thighs; the problem is that girls, very YOUNG girls, are subconsciously forced to believe that dressing a certain way is the correct because it will make men attracted to them. The way women are being morphed into sexual objects more and more in the media affects every single girl that is exposed to any portion of society.  Even if a girl avoids advertisements, television, movies, newspapers, magazines, and newscasts is still able to see the way the media portrays women through the way people treat each other in the real world.  This whole situation is a lot like the Krebs Cycle, also known as the Citric Acid Cycle in biology.  In the Krebs Cycle, oxyloacetate attaches to an Acetyl group and sends it through a very complicated process that expels a few NADH+H+, a FADH, some CO2, and a small amount of ATP.  The cool thing about the Krebs Cycle is that while all of this is happening, the molecules in the mitochondrial matrix are working to build that oxyloacetate back up to start the cycle again with the next set of Acetyl groups.  The objectification of women is a lot like the Krebs Cycle because it begins with the media, which pumps out more and more images and ideas that encourage the issues we have today.  Throughout the cycle, many complicated things occur; girls hate themselves, girls cut themselves, girls can't look at themselves in the mirror, girls think they aren't worthy of love from anyone (especially a boy), girls read magazines, girls starve themselves, girls make themselves vomit after every meal, girls read more magazines, boys read magazines, boys beat girls, boys rape girls, boys kill girls, girls rape boys, boys rape boys, boys and girls make it into the newspaper, boys and girls go to prison, boys and girls make national television... and it all cycles back around to the media.  Well, would you look at that.  Isn't biology amazing?

(Disclaimer: by NO means am I assuming that all boys beat/rape/kill girls. For goodness sake, I'm not a man-hater.  But it's an issue that I strongly believe is influenced by the media's tendency to objectify women and make beating/raping/killing women more OK than it ever should be.)

[CC] The Infant Woman

One of the many points that Jean Kilbourne briefly discusses in her documentary Killing us Softly is the idea that women are often portrayed in the media as childlike.  The use of this kind of image is because it draws the connection between women and innocence.  By inserting the "child" theme between a grown woman and absolute purity, an almost entirely fictional line can be drawn within one small image.  It seems that this kind of tactic would be more effective in selling a product to men than women because it is (believe it or not) a highly sexualized theme.  These images cause men to contemplate the ability to tempt such innocence. A child is untouched and (ideally) free of flaws; to turn such a precious thing into something womanly, something that is seen as socially acceptable to think about in a sexual way, breaks that separation between child and adult.  
I can speak from experience with seeing this type of image because I see it in the Korean music industry on a regular basis.  In fact, K-Pop fans are clearly able to categorize every single music video that comes from a girl group or girl soloist as "sexy" or "cute" based on the concept they pursue for that music video or album.  Koreans, being the masters of cute poses (famously known as 애교 "aegyo"), see being cute as a life-long trait, especially for women.  The cutesy image has been extended for boys over the last decade as the music industry has grown.  In fact, music videos from boy groups and male soloists are always filed under two concepts: cute vs. tough.  (Notice that while "cute" is a common concept, "tough" is the alternative for boys and "sexy" is the alternative for girls).  Luckily, the Korean music industry does not tend to sexualize this childlike and cute concept. This is primarily due to the taboo that Korea holds over the topic of sex.  However, the increasing westernization of East Asia brings out the possibility that the sexy and cute concepts of Korean girl groups could merge into what we see as the sexualization of childish women in the western world.  
One might argue that this is not a form of objectification.  However, this theme uses the idea of making women the embodiment of a living doll makes a woman more like, well, a doll.  This advertising technique also becomes an issue when it subconsciously creates an acceptable view on child pornography and pedophilia.  Of course, by no means am I accusing all men of being closet pedophiles, but I do want to stress the importance of recognizing this sexualization of little girls because, frankly, it's quite gross.