I overheard a soundbite on the radio the other day about how Paris, Britney, and Lindsay have too much influence over young girls these days, and how some girls are trying to counteract their influence by opting for a squeaky clean image rather than a slutty one. This sounded like a great idea...except for one thing. Didn't Britney and Lindsay start off with squeaky clean images themselves? And if so, could that possibly be part of the problem?
In other words, by trying so hard to completely eradicate all hints of sexuality from popular culture, are we unintentionally turning sexuality into that much larger a taboo and making it that much more attractive to anyone wishing to cast off their virginal image?
LOL. Well, ok, then. Anybody disagree completely?
Sexuality used to be a beautiful, natural part of being human. For some reason, many religions felt threatened by that and insinuated over centuries that it involved darkness and evil possibilities.
Some of the results in this age of openess and public display (I mean, if you told someone twenty years ago that they would publish their daily diary for millions to see, they would've called you nuts! Today it's called a blog), are that girls who feel they are damaged and "dirty" think, "Fine, I'll show the world how dirty I am!" The problem (besides the hurt these girls are going through) is that the women flaunting their sexuality for positive reasons get caught up in the same backlash and negativity.
So. We as a society go back to opposite thinking. "Sexuality must be bad, people are exploited through it, only damaged people do that, women who dress like that are asking for rape", etc, - and therefore it's better to behave with more "purity" and restraint.
Which leads to further rebellion in the next cycle. Catch-22.
Edit to add: So re-reading what I wrote, I think I actually slightly disagree after all. This goes back a lot further than Britney, Paris, et al. I think this current rediscovering sexuality cycle began in the 1960s. The residual negativity from eons of conditioning are deforming a natural exploration.
Yes and back in the late 70's and early 80's the girls dressed up like Pat Benatar and Madonna as well.
Of course, it is a bit more extreme today with the choices given.
Britney, Paris, Lindsay are in the news way too much as party girls and it is sending a bad message for kids. Parents used to be up in arms about Barbie, they should be up in arms about this as well.
Send a message to them. Tell the kids that they can't go to Britney's concerts, Paris's hotels and Lindsay's movies.
Boycott them and wake them up. lol. I know easier said than done.
Yes, I agree. I didn't mean to suggest that Britney and Lindsay were the first girls to remake their goody-two shoes image, opting for a more "sexually liberated" one.
Elle created hits it right on the nose, I think. The more a society tries to portray sexuality as evil, the more extreme the next backlash against it will be.
I have to say that I admire the French for their more natural attitude about this. On the one hand, they don't pretend as if sex or nudity are evil, and they see a certain degree of sexual expression or sensuality as normal. Regardless of age, they all pretty much seem to think that sex is natural and that accepting our sexuality is necessary for emotional and physical well-being. You see this more centered attitude in their fashion, for example. Whereas in the United States, teenage girls dress in sometimes shockingly suggestive clothing, while older women tend to wear frumpy, desexualized clothing that marks them as wives and mothers, French women dress differently. Regardless of age, it is not uncommon to see a French woman wear one piece of suggestive clothing, whether it be a pair of fishnet stockings or a low-cut blouse or mini skirt, but she couples this one item with an otherwise fairly conservative and non-provocative outfit. It's as if French woman of all ages want to be free to express their sexuality but don't feel the need to flaunt it.
I wish we here in the United States had a more measured attitude towards sexuality, as well.
Just in: -- A court has ordered pop singer Britney Spears to give up custody of her children effective Wednesday at noon, according to court papers. CNN
Don't you find it interesting that Kevin Federline has children with another woman and he doesn't want custody of those children??
It couldn't have anything to do with the money he is going to get paid in child support from Britney could it or am I just TOO jaded.
You know, there is something incredibly self-deprecating for a woman to pick a man to be her boyfriend who has one child out of wedlock and another one on the way.