I love those type of posts as they occupy an intersection of so much in America we are afraid to admit, or even discuss, plagues us. Women diving head first into fads end up supporting traditional norms by either what they support under the surface or how goddamn ridiculous they look supporting. We can't talk about women getting significantly fatter, but we all know it. We know it's wrong. Men and women have both become fatter, but there is a difference. We know by height and bone structure that the 30 lb weight gain by women who stayed the same exact average height (5'4") is different than the 30 lb weight gain by men who also grew in average height by three inches in the same time frame. Our American lifestyle is broken, especially for women. To discuss any of it, we'd receive the "fat shaming" onslaught. I don't care because with each "share" of that TIME 1955 meme, the chubbsters support my idea that they hate being fat and in-shape is beautiful... and healthy. The need to silence any criticism is that we would be pointing out that the progressive's, 21st century social paradise is a shit-show.
This is just a small aspect of a deeper problem of public discourse. American media so easily criticizes other nations for behaviors and problems that America has on an even bigger scale. We also talk all of the time but never about what matters. Even if we tried, we would be shushed with accusations of racism, sexism or homophobia by the volunteer thought police and then the mandarins of public debate. Not discussing problems was an old Hollywood joke about WASP families, which was an unfair smear when countless social groups do it. It's societal wide now. The prog excuses are even more strained. I love to read articles that blame black women being enormous in 2015 on the legacy of slavery because I can look at photos from the 1960s (50 years closer to slavery) and see a plethora of slender black women. That excuse ain't working except on true believers and fellow fatties.
The Hollywood selection for size 0 women bothers me too but from a "I don't like skeletons" perspective. Film and TV are escapism. Why would I project myself into a role where my sexual pairing is built like a boy? C'mon Hollywood homos. A little known and now defunct blog "Revolt Against the Modern World" had a great post on Hollywood egalitarianism making us all jerks. It's a great post on how Hollywood pushes so many unattractive or skeletal women to be considered sexy or cute in the name of diversity and equality. Narrative over reality. Force feeding an egalitarian idea of beautiful over the idea that there is an objective, traditional view of beauty. We're not all pretty, but we know it when we see it.
The linked post by Flavia is fantastic. I like to think of the flip side, too. Who gets sidelined because of Hollywood's choices? There is a limit to roles, so if producers stuff in Narrative hires, who sees their Hollywood career go down a lower track? There is one woman who, had she been an actress 20 or more years earlier, would have had a bigger career: Diora Baird. Bad pic on Wikipedia, just Google her with the Safe Search "off". It's worth it.
|Very Catherine Deneuve-ish|
|Seriously, Hollywood WTF?|
She is like Catherine Deneuve... with giant breasts. No steady career, and she smartly married someone with a weekly network drama role and has a kid. Jesus Christ though, how the hell did she not have a bigger career? Same goes for Kathleen Robertson. Robertson and Denueve would have been perfect '80s action movie or '70s disaster movie babes. Can't imagine why Hollywood did not cast either buxom, red head/blonde girls for romantic leads or action movie love interests. Even throwing one in a Judd Apatow comedy would have been fine. Must have been parts meant for Michelle Rodriguez, Jennifer "Aging Spinster" Aniston, Lucy Liu, Kate Hudson and Zoe Saldana.
Enough! Cheesecake meandering is over, go do something productive this Friday.
|Even Playboy was smart enough to shoot a set|