You don't marry a hamburger and throw a fit when you find out it's delicious.
I haven't seen the movie, but...what?
The hamburger quotation is pretty gross. Is the point that yes, she's a whore, but we all knew that? Or is it that hot women are all whores? Because I personally object to the idea that married women who act/flirt/fuck with other men are whores, full stop.
Kid Rock is, of course, a Republican, and so should have strong family values.
what?
Looks to me like the Superficial is comparing sexy girl P. Anderson to a delicious burger, stating that K. Rock married her out of infatuation with her sexy/slutty aspect, and then was put out by her exhibition of that aspect in the movie. But I haven't seen it either.
B, you're looking for nuance where it ain't. The point is that women are meat to be consumed.
I second Ogged's love. What's hilarious is that Kid's reaction makes even less sense once you see the movie, since the most risque bits of PA's screen time are taken from Baywatch, which, one imagines, Kid Rock knew about before marriage.
So big surprise, Kid Rock is a misogynist dick. Who'da thunk.
The reveal here is that Kid Rock, principled vegetarian & activist, was conflicted by the discovery that a woman made of hamburger could taste so delicious, especially one who took such a pronounced stance against eating meat (cf. Pamela Anderson v. KFC). The reader knows all along, of course, that Anderson's objections were to chicken, not fake breasts per se, and certainly not her own hamburger helpings.
2 makes me suspect B hasn't seen the movie. Pam doesn't so much as flirt with anyone in Borat. In fact, the only thing Pam did in that movie was let other guys desire her, which is what I guess Bob is objecting to. Also why the superficial quote makese sense, and is funny.
Armsmasher, are you channeling Bridgeplate?
10: I haven't. You'll note that I wrote "act with other men" as one of the three possible options.
Another possible option is that Pamela Anderson has a sneakier and savvier publicist than Kid Rock does.
Darn you, slol. I was about to praise 9, which I can't do now without looking terribly vain.
Is the point that yes, she's a whore, but we all knew that? Or is it that hot women are all whores?
I think the point is that if you marry a woman whose fame rests entirely on being a surgically-enhanced sex object and whose biggest selling movie is her giving a blowjob to Mötley Crüe's drummer, you don't have the right to get pissed off at her being cast as a sex object in a movie.
was conflicted?... I remember that B-Wo back in the day declared that there are no new verbs.
14: aw, take it as a compliment. You're both brilliant, minds so fine....
No fair eating, unless you have enough to share with the whole class.
Whatever. It's hard to believe that either of them entered the marriage thinking that it would last. Absent physical violence or harm to the kids or whatnot, it's all good: I assume the drama is part of the point of it all for both of them.
Cobb salad, slo?
The Dhimmicrats are gonna have to raise some taxes, so the Sm/thson/an can get some silverware up in this mother.
so the Sm/thson/an can get some silverware up in this mother
It would be awfully nice if the Sm/thson/an could just keep its darn museums open.
I preferred this version of the joke "And getting mad at Pamela Anderson for being a slut is like getting mad at a Smurf for being blue."
Or is it that hot women are all whores?
Just wishful thinking, IMX.
so I went to the link.
And there I found the *really* important story.
Britney Spears' essay on Sophocles' Antigone (in the Rex Warner translation). It's up for auction at Christie's.
Aren't some of y'all out there Classicists, too? Don't you want to add an important autograph manuscript to your university's collection?
Just think, in only three thousand years, this will be an ancient piece of evidence about a lost play. Scholars will try to figure out whether Rex Warner got his first name from having translated Oedipus Rex. And the Britney papyrus will be the only surviving account of the plot of the Antigone.
Also:
Busty beauty PAMELA ANDERSON has urged women to follow her example by claiming their "inner slut". The former BAYWATCH star regrets many of the sexual blunders she's made in the past but is glad she finally embraced the dirty side of her personality.
She admits, "I think everybody's a slut and they should admit it. I was sexual from a very early age but I've kind of learned over the years to have more fun with it. At the time I didn't see anything wrong with the PLAYBOY stuff but now I can look back on a lot of things I've done in my career and my life and go, yes I am a little bit of a slut."
"slut"?
Well, she's no Madonna, tell you that much right now.
29: Awesome.
28: There's a difference between what one is allowed to call onself, and what others are allowed to call one.
In addition to 28 and 29, there is the headline to this post. which made me think you were part of the embrace-your-inner-slut crowd.
I don't understand why more men don't get behind the embrace-your-inner-slut movement. After all, it increases their chances of embracing someone's outer slut.
I second B on this - just because you penis-encumbered sorts lust for the veggie-burger does not mean that a) the veggie-burger is randomly available to those who desire it; b) the veggie-burger can be purchased like any cheap Big Mac; or c) you should malign the veggie-burger just because it has a pleasant aroma and a really nice slice of tomato peeking out from beneath its sesame-seeded bun.
Dumb-as-a-Rock appears to have felt that a wedding ring meant the little woman should take to wearing a burqa. Perhaps we should send him off to permanently entertain the troops in Afghanistan, where he will doubtless feel right at home.
Awesome.
I think that should definitively take the "gross" out of the Superficial quote.
32: The essential problem is that what XYs tend to mean by "slut" and what XXs mean by "inner-slut" are two very different things.
The pity is that there isn't a word for "woman embracing her sexuality" that isn't also used as a pejorative.
32, 34: Once again, I direct you to my response to 28 in 31. Me embracing my inner slut? Awesome. You guys embracing my inner slut? Totally fair, since we're friendly-like. Some random person embracing Pammy's slut? Out of bounds, unless Pammy's effectively given them permission, which 29 implies, hence I effectively retracted my "c'mon, Rob" in 31.
But I still think the hamburger remark is uncool. If you like, we can argue about the famous Hustler meat-grinder cover.
32 cross posted with 31.
But I wasn't saying anything about anyone else, I was admiring what a third person had said about someone else. And since the third person might be female, they would also get the "you can make fun of your own group" passcard.
I'm still cross posting a lot. Also, I have no particular allegiance to anything I've said so far, so I'll retract my 24, too, and soon the whole thread will be retracted.
Kid Rock seems like he might be kinda slutty too.
The hamburger comment was great because there's no negative connotation to "hamburger." Like apo said in 15, it meant that you can't marry a busty liberated sex lover and then get mad when she acts like a busty liberated sex lover.
I avoided the smurf line because of the slut thing. Some other time we can argue about whether "slut" should mean anything at all.
I'm mostly about embracing the outer slut, myself.
Nonono, see JM, "slutty" is only used to describe girls -- for boys its fine, nobody minds if you sleep around. I'm a little surprised you haven't picked up on this.
Didn't we have a long thread about male sluts? I'm pretty sure Kid Rock was mentioned.
32: Huh, I don't know the joke (and women are perfectly capable about being bitchy/sexist towards women, btw).
40: There's no negative connotation to "hamburger"? Okay, I'll assume this is because you are an immigrant and/or haven't read enough feminist criticism, but the sexist associations of hamburger are very well-known in feminist circles.
Maybe this was all in my imagination.
Candidate for new mouseover text?
but the sexist associations of hamburger are very well-known in feminist circles.
To be fair, you could replace "hamburger" with any word in the English language without invalidating the sentence.
If Unfogged were on fire, the commentariat would argue over whether the fire hose gushing water was sexist, not sexist, or sexist, but in a playful way we can all appreciate in this brave new world with such people in it.
I think we can all agree a fire hose gushing water is sexy.
That's not fair, Cala. Men catch on fire, too.
46: I was thinking of the general rule that says that lets Richard Pryor and Chris Rock use the N-word, lets Jewish people make Jewish jokes, etc.
Has anyone else seen that cover before? It was new to me.
48: Did you follow the link? That's a pretty famous cover. And I know you're joking hyperbolically, but no; there aren't *that* many analogies that have the same visceral effect, actually.
That's presuming that we wouldn't let the mothafucka BURN.
54 -- I had seen it. It was a pretty big story in some alternative paper (the Village Voice IIRC, possibly the Nation) when it came out.
54: I'd seen it. (Well, I didn't click through, but with 'hamburger' and 'Hustler', I'm pretty sure I know what it is.)
I hadn't seen it. And this
Every month's Hustler is mailed, uninvited and for free, to the office of each member of the United States Congress.was also news to me.
54: Did you not see The People Versus Larry Flynt? It's probably the only Hustler cover most non-customers could name. IIRC, it was also the first cover after Flynt had his short-lived religious conversion (following a meeting with Jimmy Carter's sister, no less).
(Checking again I see I was only 8 "when it came out" -- so I must be remembering reading a story which referenced the original coverage.)
Nope, didn't see the movie. That must be it.
That cover appears in the documentary, Not a Love Story , which we watched in my grade 13 religion class.
It's a good movie and worth seeing, though I thought Forman could have made it more powerful by confronting the audience with more representative Hustler imagery, to really underscore the First Amendment tensions. It was all just implied in the film.
Of course, he couldn't have gotten it distributed then.
I clicked through, but the phrase quoted in the post isn't related to that picture. Any phrase about being surprised by your own expectations would have worked as well. ('In other news, Kid Rock professed to being shocked and horrified that water is wet.')
grade 13
Canadia! Bare Naked Ladies!
And there's something tricksy about letting Anderson casually use "slut" in a somewhat political way in the same fashion done by other women who have an actual point.
58: See? It's not just the movie, although I guess the movie made it *more* famous. It was hugely controversial when it came out, and I'll bet you a hundred imaginary dollars that 99 feminists out of 100 would know it immediately. Honestly, I'm amazed you've never seen it before.
Any phrase about being surprised by your own expectations would have worked as well.
Exactly. And any other phrase wouldn't have the problematic associations that come up when you analogize "hamburger" with "sexy woman."
I'd never seen it before. Am I not a feminist? I've never belonged to a feminist discussion group.
42 - Poet and scholar Rick Nielsen would beg to disagree with your statement.
And any other phrase wouldn't have the problematic associations that come up when you analogize "hamburger" with "sexy woman."
Please don't accuse people of insensitivity for being unaware that two otherwise-inoffensive words within a certain distance of each other might offend certain people. This is starting to remind me of the outraged people writing to cancel their subscriptions because the crossword puzzle used the word "scumbag".
66: Why do you assume that PA isn't making a point?
69: It's the kind of thing that comes up if you read feminist literature; not having seen it doesn't make you not a feminist by conviction, but it makes it more likely that you're not immersed in feminist writing.
72: I don't see sufficient evidence in other statements or public presentations to indicate that she is. It looks like a marketing ploy, a la Madonna or Jena Jameson.
You don't marry a hamburger and throw a fit when you find out it's delicious.
Given that this is the quote, it doesn't seem like the point is 'Pam Anderson is just a piece of meat' but 'Don't complain when what you have is exactly what you were promised.'
It's not flattering, but the 'delicious' to my mind makes it not exactly the same sort of reference as the Hustlers' cover.
71: Please don't accuse me of accusing people of anything unless I've actually done so.
Seriously, why is it that whenever I say "X has Y association, didn't you know?" (or some version thereof) that people think that's an accusation of ill intent? Hamburger *does* have that association for most people who've spent any time at all reading anything about feminism and media imagery (which is pretty basic feminist stuff, folks). If you don't know that, you don't know it. What's the problem? Is it that I'm surprised that certain pop culture images aren't known by the commenters here? Do people get equally huffy when someone expresses surprise at their not knowing some 70s guitar rock anthem or saccharine popular cartoon?
75: I'm not saying it's the *point*. I'm saying it's an *association* caused by an unfortunate analogy.
71: Yeah, but does the hamburger analogy really get to 'otherwise inoffensive'? 'How could you be angry at PA for being the deliciously consumable foodstuff that she is; it would be as silly to judge her for her sexuality as it would be to judge any delectable morsel for being eaten.' Eh, it's the kind of thing that may be too common to worry much about, but it's still kind of unpleasantly dismissive.
"Yeah, but he wasn't calling anybody tarbaby, Jon. He was using it figuratively. It's like if somebody spilled Saltines on the putting green and I said, 'Hey look at all those goddamned crackers on the golf course!' Look, it sounds bad, but it doesn't mean anything. Though I do hate it when some crackers mess up the country club."
-Larry Wilmore, Senior Black Correspondent
The Daily Show
Didn't we have a long thread about male sluts?
I missed it? Arg.
The fact that we have to resort to poorly understood alternative terms points up the need for having different words for 'woman who likes sex, likes flirting with members of her preferred sex or gender, occasionally open to a mutually respectful fling' and 'woman with problems with intimacy and prone to poorly negotiated one-night-stands' and 'woman who wears her sexuality on her sleeve for social or commercial purposes'. The fact is that Pamela Anderson is a professional sex object, and nothing more is required to brand one as a 'slut' to some onlookers. She could be chaste as Mary, but since her job is to be a sex object, she's a slut. Which is absurd, of course, but some men (Kid Rock, for example) can't get past the 'she stands around with... with... with BOOBS, so she must be having teh naughty sex with strangers all the time'. Which just goes to show that it's not us video game players that have trouble telling the difference between fantasy and reality.
I suspect that were I female, I'd be thought of as pretty slutty by my friends (to whom, to be fair, such a judgment is on the same moral energy level as noting that I really like coffee), simply because I'm pretty comfortable forming quick, relatively casual sexual relationships. For a guy, it's mostly considered normal (though I suspect that it's more 'normal to want to' rather than 'normal to do'), but for a girl in most of our local subcultures, it's much more heavily judged.
Do people get equally huffy when someone expresses surprise at their not knowing some 70s guitar rock anthem or saccharine popular cartoon?
I don't know about "equally", but yeah, that's a pretty good way to get people's backs up.
77: I think my point is that the association is a bit of a stretch. This may be because I'm recalling a phrase that has 'steak' or 'champagne' instead of 'hamburger', and to me it seems that the phrase was just modified to be down-market.
Oh yeah, and I'm shocked that you've never run into that dynamic before.
Haven't you all read The Sexual Politics of Meat? It's a must-read for all feminist animal rights activists. The author has a helpful slide show --http://www.triroc.com/caroladams/slideshow.html
78: It is a little unpleasantly dismissive, but I think it's the least unpleasantly dismissive article on the front page of The Superficial. It's a celebrity gossip site. It's called superficial. What can one really expect?
Why is it that the location of a particular phrase, sentence, analogy, or picture prevents people from criticizing.
And I'd seen the hustler cover. Still shocks to look at it again, though.
If the Superficial wanted to use a more neutral analogy, they certainly could have. Is somebody seriously proposing that the one that was used was intended to be neutral?
I grow terribly, terribly weary of this sort of coded language, as if we're supposed to pretend that when you call something 'urban', you don't mean 'fear the blackies!' or 'New York liberal' doesn't mean 'dirty Jew coming for your money!'. And as if comparing Pamela Anderson to hamburger is somehow not a reference to decades of similar comparisons and analogies.
81: I think the work there is done by 'equally'. People may get hostile over pop-culture, but the request in 71 that B. not 'accuse' people is huffier than the norm.
If anyone wants to know what I think:
(a) The comparison of PA to a piece of meat? Ick, and not so much less ick because it was meant as a compliment. Still ick if she were being compared to a steak.
(b) The Hustler cover? Another example of comparing women to meat. I am certain that it was not in the Superficial writer's mind when they made the comparison, but they're doing a similar thing, just with much less hostility.
(c) B? If I understand her correctly, was reminded of the Hustler cover by the 'hamburger' connection, and brought it up as an association and an example of what equating women with meat can look like. The point is not that 'This piece of arcane feminist-pop-culture knowledge renders the hamburger metaphor offensive. It would have been a fine thing to say if the Hustler cover never existed, but given the existence of the Hustler cover, it's offensive and you're all responsible for knowing this.' It's that the thought is offensive, and the Hustler cover expresses a linked thought.
Still shocks to look at it again
Likewise. Moreso now, I think, than last time I saw it.
In fact, the lead in of editorial comment in the post was "If you've seen Borat you know Kid Rock is out of his mind. It's probably the least slutty thing Pamela Anderson has done since she was twelve." Even applying rational standards, as opposed to celebrity gossip standards, this is not dismissive of Pamela Anderson.
Well, I'll say this much: if I'd known about the Hustler cover and the history of hamburgers and women, I probably would have skipped the quote (like I skipped the smurf/slut line). This should in no way be taken to mean that B isn't humorless.
From: "It's probably the least slutty thing Pamela Anderson has done since she was twelve."
to
Even applying rational standards, as opposed to celebrity gossip standards, this is not dismissive of Pamela Anderson.
I'm not following the thought process.
It's respectful of her role in Borat, but through the mechanism of describing the entire rest of her life as unbroken sluttiness. This isn't dismissive?
Not that the association doesn't exist for people steeped in feminist literature.
But the target audience of the Superficial is not such people, so the answer to 2 is 15, and we have yet another demonstration that when you respond to someone's at least plausibly somewhat innocent statement by responding to a negative interpretation of it, they get annoyed.
94: but it isn't even plausibly that innocent; you can't pretend it is devoid of symbolism, even if you are ignorant of other meat comparisons.
Is it dismissive to say that she made her career and fame on being a surgically enhanced sex object?
If you want to see horrifyingly dismissive/contemptuous, look in the comments on that site.
(On the model stuff, I was wrong. But this?)
Did Kid Rock thought he was marrying a hamburger? Not knowing anything other than his public persona, it seems likely.
83: I run into it all the time, which is why I wrote 76. People get defensive about feminism in ways that they don't about 70s rock. The reasons for that are obvious, but that only makes it slightly less annoying when one tries to point something out and then has to deal with people getting their backs up.
Look, I'll make the argument for you guys. "Okay, the woman-in-meat-grinder image is gross, and I can see why you're making the association. But obviously a lot of people aren't versed in the ins and outs of that particular argument, and although they might be vaguely aware of the 'woman as meat' analogy as part of historical sexism, they aren't going to make the association you make with the Superficial quote, because they're not 'feminists' in the same way you are, or because they have different associations with "delicious" or "hamburger." The problem is that associations like that aren't a simple question of "yes it is" or "no it isn't"; it's that the connotations of language depend a lot on what discourse community you belong to."
Note that that argument in no way resembles the "you're reading too much into it" argument or the "that association isn't there" argument. Of course there are people who won't see the connotation, and of course (I assume) the Superficial folks weren't intending it. That doesn't mean it isn't there for people who pay attention to these things (which doesn't, in its turn, mean that people who don't are inherently bad or inherently ignorant people).
Okay?
Is it dismissive to say that she made her career and fame on being a surgically enhanced sex object?
No.
If you want to see horrifyingly dismissive/contemptuous, look in the comments on that site.
By which you mean the Superficial, no? Arguably, it invites horrifyingly dismissive and contemptuous comments with the hamburger comparison, imho.
94: Okay. I'm going to talk slowly here. The association between a sexy woman and a piece of meat, as a means of contemptuously dehumanizing her, does not exist solely in the minds of feminists. An easy way of checking the truth of this statement is to think to yourself "Self, what was the intended audience of that Hustler cover? Was it 'people steeped in feminist literature'? Or was it 'men who buy porn'? I suppose it was the latter, which means that the equation of sexual women with meat probably means something outside of the women's studies department."
Feminists get deliberately conscious about this stuff as a route toward encouraging people to quit it. But someone who isn't familiar with the sexual woman=meat equation from feminist literature, like, presumably, the Superficial writer, can still be appealing to the same sort of unpleasantly contemptuous and regressive imagery that Larry Flynt (also innocent of the feminist literature) was appealing to with the meat-grinder cover.
No one wants to injure the Superficial writer. I'm sure whoever it is is a very nice person who didn't intend to say anything bad. But what they said was a nasty misogynist thing to say, and there's no way to ask people to stop saying that sort of thing without pointing out what's wrong with it.
No one wants to injure the Superficial writer. I'm sure whoever it is is a very nice person who didn't intend to say anything bad.
Of course he did, that's his bread and butter. Like I said, I wouldn't have quoted it if I'd known about the cover, but I think the women=meat thing, by itself, is no big deal. Studly guy=hunk=beefy, after all. Meat=sex in some sense; what's wrong with the Hustler cover is that it's horrifyingly violent and gruesome.
95 - I thought it was plausibly innocent, because I hadn't heard of the Hustler cover and still haven't seen it. I was very, very mildly irked, 'cause why does meat have to be the standard for all that is yummy when Ogged knows that some of us are vegetarian, but I was going to rise above the constant oppression I face here and console myself over lentils for dinner.
can still be appealing to the same sort of unpleasantly contemptuous and regressive imagery that Larry Flynt (also innocent of the feminist literature) was appealing to with the meat-grinder cover.
Even unconsciously, they could be appealing to it.
In the interests of fair play, Flynt is on record saying that the Hustler cover (and associated pictoral of women as meat, by the way) was intended as satire of the "woman as meat" association: see here for an interview in which Susie Bright defends him on those grounds. (It's at the bottom half of her first answer.)
(And of course I'm going to disagree with Ogged that the woman = meat thing is more or less equivalent to the man = beefy thing, partly because of the existence of that cover and other things, e.g. the Paris Hilton Carl's Junior ad--that is, the beefy guy association isn't nearly as prevalent or damaging. But that's a separate argument, and I have to go pick up PK at school now.)
101: Oh, and not everything with a misogynist overtone is always evil, or always something that shouldn't be said. I just got huffy in 100 (and Jake, let me retract the 'I'm going to talk slowly' comment. That was unnecessarily rude) because it just doesn't work to say that something can't be misogynist because the speaker doesn't consciously think about misogyny.
I'm not fond of the Superficial style of snarkiness, but if the answer is "Of course it's misogynistic; the point is to go for kind of nastiness that's available in making fun of celebrities" I suppose that's fine.
From 29: I was sexual from a very early age but I've kind of learned over the years to have more fun with it.
Ummm, is anyone else finding that quote a bit on the creepy side? Or is it just me?
98: I don't have a particular opinion on the Hamburger Battle at the moment, but I'm always a little surprised when people claim to be surprised when other people get defensive about feminism. (Or pick other hot-button liberal / progressive topic, it's not just feminism.) Surely part of the point of feminist theory and writing is that, when a feminist speaks up and says "so-and-so is gross," it should carry some sting, yes? It's like calling someone out for using a racist trope; of course doing so is at least a moderately big deal, and of course some people are going to get defensive about it. Why should that be a shock?
102: well, you aren't alone. will it help if I commiserate over yummy lentils?
question: is the phrase `beefy' applied to men really connoting meat, or bulls?
83: I run into it all the time, which is why I wrote 76.
Would I have been more successful at conveying my meaning if I'd followed 83 with a semicolon and a right-parenthesis?
Hamburger *does* have that association for most people who've spent any time at all reading anything about feminism and media imagery (which is pretty basic feminist stuff, folks).
Honestly, I'm amazed you've never seen it before.
I consider myself a feminist, but I hadn't seen the cover before, nor have I spent much time reading about feminism and media imagery. Can I still consider myself a feminist?
107 - Of course. You're invited. I have greens, too.
re 103
I think paul krassner was responsible for the Hustler cover. His previous claim to fame was a fake story about LJB fucking JFK in his bullet hole on the plane ride back from dallas. The cover is misogynistic but in a weird, failed-satire way.
why does meat have to be the standard for all that is yummy
Only a vegetarian would ask such an obvious question. Just like they are the only people who would say, with a straight face, portobellos are like meat.
But they are!
In fact, portobellos should be the standard for all that's yummy.
113: portabellos aren't anything like meat. Often, they're much better.
People, it's the apostropher's birthday, enough with the crazy mushroom talk.
No, they are not like meat. Portobellos are like mushrooms.
115 gets it right. Claims that Food Product A is a great replacement for Food Product B are generally only true for people who ignore the texture of their food.
yeah, I'm old enough to remember the reaction to the hustler cover when it first came out. My reaction at the time was a wave of nausea on seeing a copy of it. There are some very sick people out there.
I also remember, some years later, working next door to a strip joint in Southeast D.C. and having the proprietor jocularly greet a former employee by addressing her as a "hamburger whore". I don't think this meant "stripper", I think instead it was a way of calling her an inexpensive prostitute.
Such was jocularity, between a white business owner, and a black woman, in Anacostia in the '70s. Makes me so glad that racism and sexism are a thing of the distant past.
"portabellos aren't anything like meat. Often, they're much better."
man, I don't want to sound like Jeanne Kirkpatrick, but I really getted irked at this kind of morel equivalence.
121: you're raising a morel opposition?
anyway, morels aren't like portabellos either.
Crimini! I'm so pissed off my shirt is popping buttons.
124: crimini's, otoh, are exactly like portabellos.
I have friends who send me links to the Superficial all the time, or at least frequently. It almost always makes me cringe, because while to my mind being a celebrity invites objectification, it doesn't have to invite gratuitous meanness. By the standard of celebrity gossip in general and that site in particular, the Pamela Anderson / Kid Rock bit was positively glowing. Should that inform the discussion? I don't know, but I think so.
125: bad apostrophe. I ban myself.
Has anyone else seen that cover before? It was new to me.
I hadn't see it either. I've only see Hustler a couple times, but it always seemed more gross than erotic.
more gross than erotic.
Yeah, it's never been clear to me who finds Hustler to be worthy masturbation material, but I still sorta see Larry Flynt as an American hero.
But I still think the hamburger remark is uncool.
Weirdly, the fact that it was described as "delicious" hamburger had the effect, for me, not of rhetorically lowering Ms. Anderson to the level of a piece of meat, but of raising her to the level of something delicious.
130: I think a lot of porn is less for titillation and more for reassuring us that women are dumb and easily manipulated. This is useful if someone's fear of castrating bitches has rendered him unable to sustain an erection.
Sorry if this makes me sound like a feminazi, but for about 95% of the porn out there I would instantly lose any respect for someone who gladly admitted to watching/reading it.
132: I think a lot of porn is less for titillation and more for reassuring us that women are dumb and easily manipulated.
I thought the point was to reassure us that manipulation is irrelevant.
132: 95% of porn based on what sample? While Hustler may be a representative porno mag, the internet has really revolutionized the porn industry, not least in allowing the creation of smaller and smaller niches, which while it will increase the amount of porn that any one person finds gratifying, will increase the amount of porn they find disturbing/squicking much more.
106: It's not a shock. But I'm pretty firmly in the camp that your (hypothetical you) emotional reaction to X is not my responsibility to control. Especially when I'm not deliberately trying to piss you off.
110: As the person in charge of who can and can't consider themselves a feminist, I hereby revoke your feminist card.
Which is to say, dude, it's not up to me. I'm just saying that the sexism of media images and porn are a pretty well-worn truisms, and that particular image is one of the most shocking examples of both. I'm sure that there are lots of feminist 101 things that I've happened to miss; when someone points one out to me, I add it to my repertoire rather than getting defensive about it.
Huh, I had never seen that Hustler cover, that's rather disturbing (though I can see it being satire intended to make fun of feminists, which is a different sort of offensive.)
Just so I'm clear, is the point that replacing "hamburger" with "ice cream cone" in the statement would make it far less objectionable?
This is far and away the most apalling incident of humorless feminist syndrome I've ever seen at Unfogged. 15 and 131 get it exactly right, except that "weirdly" in 131 s/b "obviously, you losers."
Replacing "hamburger" with "ice cream cone" would maintain the basic idea and avoid evoking the Hustler cover (which I'd never seen before, by the way, but I'm willing to believe B that it's famous), but I think the Superficial writer chose hamburger for its associations with manliness. Wasn't there a discussion here some time ago about the popular notion in advertising that meat = MAN?
the Hustler cover (which I'd never seen before, by the way, but I'm willing to believe B that it's famous)
Of course you haven't; you're seven or something.
It feels good to pick on the one person here who's younger than you, doesn't it, Ben? Fortunately, 137 is immune to your pwnage.
L. is not, in fact, the one person here younger than me, for there are multiple people here younger than me.
L. would, of course, claim not to have seen the Hustler cover in any case, since her mom reads this site.
I hadn't seen the Hustler cover either, and I'm around their age. Or not, really. Teo is my sister's age, and she's a young'un.
I had seen the cover, and even remember being vaguely aware of the controversy when the issue came out. But then, I'm old.
140: Ogged, you dick, you essentially conceded my point upthread.
Or so the mullahs would have you believe.
I suspect the Superficial writer chose hamburger because that's what he ate for lunch. But not at McD's if his association was "delicious".
That Hustler cover struck me as satirical, what with its pronouncement that 'We will no longer hang women up like pieces of meat' juxtaposed with the graphic. Krassner's humour tended to be rather like Lenny Bruce's: more about breaking taboos and prodding discussions designed to shatter stereotypes. [Anyone remember The Realist?] Had the text been missing, the cover would have been another thing entirely; with the text, it is subversive, the subtext demanding that the observer acknowledge a certain culpability for perpetuating a stereotype that is as unappetising as the image. Portney aside, one must doubt that, absent some esoteric paraphilia, the sight of raw meat [even if accompanied by the image of a woman's legs] is arousing to the average male; hence the association woman = meat is brought into question on a subconscious level, if no other.
