This entry was posted on January 30, 2009 at 7:46 pm and is filed under Adventures . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
At last!
I hope one day girls in women’s magazines will look like the ones in men’s magazines (did you know a study show that they were on average 4/5 kilos heavier in men’s magazines?)
nike’s use of women that don’t conform to the dominant understanding of beauty does not hide or forgive or even mitigate their inherently destructive, exploitative business labor practices, or the fact that they are still selling products. note, my comments are not directed toward the women portrayed in the image, but the context itself — a coporation advertising and objectifying a woman’s to sell things that people don’t need, that are literally unhealthy and perpetuate unhealthiness.
is it a sufficient response to say “better than nothing?” or “what, would you rather have some waifish thin model selling the sneakers?” who knows. i do know that if we keep accepting the frame that always says it’s the lesser of two evils, then there’s no hope for significant changes for society and the planet.
i don’t hope, like Thibault says, that one day “girls in women’s magazines will look like the ones in men’s magazines”
i hope one day there aren’t magazines that try and sell products that in the long run oppresses most women, men, and the earth, threatening to the future of life as we know it.
January 31, 2009 at 3:46 pm
At last!
I hope one day girls in women’s magazines will look like the ones in men’s magazines (did you know a study show that they were on average 4/5 kilos heavier in men’s magazines?)
February 1, 2009 at 2:31 pm
nike’s use of women that don’t conform to the dominant understanding of beauty does not hide or forgive or even mitigate their inherently destructive, exploitative business labor practices, or the fact that they are still selling products. note, my comments are not directed toward the women portrayed in the image, but the context itself — a coporation advertising and objectifying a woman’s to sell things that people don’t need, that are literally unhealthy and perpetuate unhealthiness.
is it a sufficient response to say “better than nothing?” or “what, would you rather have some waifish thin model selling the sneakers?” who knows. i do know that if we keep accepting the frame that always says it’s the lesser of two evils, then there’s no hope for significant changes for society and the planet.
i don’t hope, like Thibault says, that one day “girls in women’s magazines will look like the ones in men’s magazines”
i hope one day there aren’t magazines that try and sell products that in the long run oppresses most women, men, and the earth, threatening to the future of life as we know it.
-cricket