The never-ending critique of girls' and womens' bodies

I've been neglecting my blog this week in favor of trying to get my paper done, a project that has been hanging over my head for no less than two years now! And it looked like it was going to be another day without an entry, that is, until I sat down at my computer with my morning coffee to engage in my usual a.m. routine of reading the news and my favorite blogs.

The illustration accompaning "the bitch wrinkle"In search of some interesting and engaging news stories I was shocked to find my usual national read, The Globe and Mail, had run this article by Sarah Hampson. Titled "Obsession with aging female parts has created a new body lexicon", the article proceed to dissect a woman's body according to how the aging process has affected it with accompanying cartoon-like sketches. There's "the bitch wrinkle", "the old lady butt", and the "vampire dinner lips." Yes, I'm serious, this was published in arguably our nation's most sophisticated paper (evidently, it has lost this title in my mind).

Perhaps the Globe caught me on a particularly feisty day, or perhaps it's all of the reading I've been doing recently about the way girls (and women) are constantly being equated with their bodies, but I fired off angry emails to Hampson and the Globe higher-ups and now I'm writing this post. Quite honestly, I'm fed up with sexist content being touted and "funny" and openly accepted in the media.

At the very basic level, focussing an entire article on dissecting a woman's body into individual "parts" is troubling and sexist, but unfortunatley has a long history in media. I would expect it from a celeb glossy, magazines that are known for reporting on Britney's cellulite, but it is even more disgusting coming from a "reputable" newspaper.

The irony of it though is that Hampson genunienly seems to wonder why women have developed such a hatred for their bodies, writing "The names suggest annoyance, never love or fondness of the type men have for some of their parts." (To which I would ask her, where has she been living the past, oh 50 years?!) Hello?! It's articles like these that make women so self conscious about their "aging female parts." She has obviously consciously overlooked the fact that she is contributing to the problem or is so unfamiliar with basic feminist debates about body image and aging that she really needs to enrol in Women's Studies 101 if she is to continue to pen articles about women.

Even Madonna can't escape misogynist body critiqueBut returning to her query about men: Why do men have a "fondness" for their aging bodies while women only seem to express hatred and disdain? Answer: Could it be because men are still depicted and regarded as aging gracefully and with sophistication while women are viewed as just getting "old"? The aging double standard lives on, in case Hampson hasn't realized it. When was the last time you heard someone pick apart George Clooney's body, while Madonna (arguably in better shape than any of us will ever be) was, as Hampson points out, criticized for having "bingo wings" while she waved to fans last month.

I understand that Hampson was perhaps trying to be "funny" with this article, a type of girlfriend gabfest where we can all get together and have a bit of a laugh about our changing mid-life bodies. And in that context - think a couple close girlfriends, a bottle of wine and some good food - it might be funny. But a national newspaper isn't that setting and I'm surprised that nobody in the editing room caught on to that.

I could even, perhaps, see the humor in the piece if male bodies were dissected alongside their female counterparts. But - surprise, surprise - this is never the case. The article would have never been published in relation to mens' bodies because it is not socially accceptable to critique male bodies the way we so avidly do womens'. Because men age with sophistication, remember?

The article also spawned numerous digusting comments, including one along the lines of: "So that's why the divorce rate is so high!"I won't even comment on such a ridiculous and troubling statement.

I'm still mystified why overt sexism is still often labelled as "funny". Problem is, it's easy to shy away from critique because no one wants to be accussed of being uptight or not having a sense of humor. But when I see things like this I'm willing to take the chance on being called "uptight", which is arguably better than "saddlebags", right?

I encourage anyone else who is offended (even my non-Canadian friends, please!) to contact the Globe and express your anger with this misogynistic article. The contact emails are:

Sarah Hampson (author) shampson@globeandmail.com

Editor-in-chief John Stackhouse: jstackhouse@globeandmail.com

Deputy Editor Sylvia Stead: sstead@globeandmail.com

I hope we one day get to the point when we can celebrate women's bodies in the media for all of the amazing things they do (like, make life!) rather than pick them apart with hatred.

xo, jessalynn

Comments

[hysperia]

Gee thanks. What a relief this post is after reading that nasty-crappy piece by Hampson. They wouldn't even let me say "WTF?" in comments!

[S.M.]

thanks for starting the campaign and for providing email addresses. Here is the letter I sent to Sarah Hampson, the Editor and the Deputy Editor:

I am writing to express my dismay and disappointment about the publication of Sarah Hampson's article, 'Obsession with aging female parts has created a new body lexicon' (published online Friday July 31, 2009). I found it insulting, shocking and extremely crude that an article listing slang about the aging female body was published in the Globe and Mail.

Since the editor and Sarah Hampson found that article so hilarious, may I suggest another? Let's call it 'Niggahs got wacked out bodies, yo - a new lexicon'. Some people might be offended by the use of 'niggahs', but hey, that's what black people call themselves so why not publish it in the national newspaper?

Perhaps I can share some ideas of body parts we can scrutinize just to get you started:

-bubble butt (get it? because they have big asses! LOL!!)

-junk in the trunk (same as above - it never stops being funny!)

-nappy hair (it's another word for 'afro', Sarah!)

-Zigaboo (another word for niggah)

-battle hammed (those crazy niggah lips)

-bad hair (Harlem slang for afro)

-good hair (Harlem slang for Caucasian-type hair)

-coal scuttle blond (a niggah chick)

-eight-rock (an ultra black niggah)

-liver-lip (huge lips)

Does anyone at the Globe and Mail see how disrespectiful and inappropriate it is to dissect people's bodies and publish unflattering slang about them? Maybe Sarah Hampson's little circle of friends thinks this is all very cute and funny. Those outside her circle of friends, however, see this as offensive and totally inappropriate for publication. Similarly, while some black people may have their own self-effacing slang for their bodies, it is totally offensive to have this slang printed in the context of a national newspaper.

An apology from Sarah Hampson and the Globe and Mail would go a long way here.

[Ed Ertl]

Misogynous? Who are you kidding? This article had nothing to do with hating women, only about (women) hating the ravages of age. Oh, and please tell me what parts we men are so proud of as we age? I don't like the 65 year old guy looking back at me in the morning mirror, but later in the day, he is A-OK., stick legs and MPB notwithstanding.
It was nice to see in some of the G&M comments that women notice all that is ugly about us fellas too; it levels out the debate.
Surely you understand that evolution got the human race to this point where men are first and foremost visual and would 'hunt for the beauty'. Of course, if a gal wants to keep a man she needs to have more going for her than her looks but it is her looks that snaired him in the firstr place.
And what is a woman's favorite position, thanks to evolution?
CEO!
Try not to forget what got us here, and loosen up. The article was in fun.
Ed Ertl