There’s a sexual ideology that holds all of these concepts together in a single place: the idea that you can celebrate Hawk Tuah girl and use her catchphrase to degrade a female politician; the idea that a starlet in a low-cut dress is yours to objectify, while contraception and sexual education are dangerous and probably immoral and should be restricted.
It harks back to the idea that was dominant in the Bush era, a moment when our culture was capable of prizing Girls Gone Wild and purity balls in equal measure, when pop stars like Britney Spears were expected to serve their audiences sex on a platter while avowing their virginity at the same time. It’s the ideology that unites Republican raunch and purity culture, that makes them two sides of the same coin: one based on the idea that women’s sexuality should exist in the service of men. The right once again championing this brand of bawdiness while working relentlessly to restrict women’s autonomy and denigrating the women they don’t like isn’t a departure. It’s a return to form.
This is classic sex negativity through the Madonna-Whore Complex where women are either “pure” virgin mothers or dirty whores. This is an old problem that still lingers. I remember my formative years in the Britney Spear, Man show raunchy period. I did enjoy portions of it at the time as a straight young man but even then I felt exploitative and forced. In hindsight it was really messed up for both men and women and especially women,
The right can’t claim any credit for the current more sex and body positive post #metoo world. People should be allowed to be both objectified if they want to be or not if they don’t want to be. This is true for everyone and can change day to day. The current climate is showing both a kinder objectification of women when they choose to be as well as objectification of men. As a men is actually refreshing and satisfying to see men treated like objects in media. Its good to see a balance in both sexes. That was never part of the rights agenda where men are only held as success objects.
We want a future where both men and women can be valued for their mind, body and souls. We want sexy outfits in videogames for men and women (and everything in between). We want men and women CEOs, scientists and leaders who are valued for their mind. This is not the future the right wants and a sexy women isn’t the antithesis of this. Sydney Sweeney and Margot Robbie being attractive and great actresses is part of this future. The same way that Chris Pine and Idris Elba can be sex symbols and great actors even in the same film. Ignore the rights stealing of something that had no hand in. Reject sex negativity
Well said. I think it all comes down to having basic respect for people’s choices. We’re sexual animals, but we all have the right to express our sexuality as little or as much as we want.
People should be allowed to be both objectified if they want to be or not if they don’t want to be. This is true for everyone and can change day to day.
I love this. Just because someone welcomes objectification one day, doesn’t imply they want it the next day.
Man, I had forgotten how much the “purity” of stars like Britney Spears and Jessica Simpson was talked about. It didn’t even seem weird at the time. (Although I was a little kid, so I probably just couldn’t notice the hypocrisy.)
A quote FTA:
“Wokeness is dead,” gloated right-wing commentator Richard Hanania on X back in March, over a video clip of Sweeney in a black dress with a plunging neckline, her breasts at the center of the frame. Hanania’s logic was obscure, but it seemed to go something like this: Sweeney’s prominently displayed chest was somehow inextricably opposed to the progressive ethos currently fashionable in popular culture.
This whole issue that this article is describing is a perfect example of why it’s impossible to argue against the right on their own terms. Their process is like this:
- Have a very loosely defined set of ideals. You can believe anything at any time. Have more of a vibe than a set of principles.
- Invent an enemy. This enemy should be vaguely defined; it is everything and nothing at the same time. For example, wokeism.
- Because your enemy is whatever you want it to be, and because your values are whatever you want them to be, you alone get to decide when you’ve won. You can declare victory at any time, for any reason. This conveniently fits your insecurity-based need to feel like a winner.
Because your enemy is whatever you want it to be, and because your values are whatever you want them to be, you alone get to decide when you’ve won. You can declare victory at any time, for any reason. This conveniently fits your insecurity-based need to feel like a winner.
I feel this so much with the definition of “woke” it means nothing and everything at the same time. Just a general vibe of something they hate. Similar to socialism.
ALWAYS FUCKING HAVE BEEN. This was the whole lockeroom talk thing. They just feel it’s ok to go mask off. We know this.
Hawk Tuah is Brat for people who watch Duck Dynasty
Vox - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Vox:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Search topics on Ground.News
https://www.vox.com/culture/371632/raunch-republicans-sydney-sweeney-hawk-tuah-girl
