Simplifying Sexuality through Wine Labels

Posted on by Former Student

Written for Wear Your Voice by Molly Murphy

Let’s just be honest here, sexuality is complicated.  There are times that you don’t know exactly who you love and where you fit in. Having these feelings of insecurity and unsureness, and THEN trying to describe your own sexuality in a way that makes sense to others is even more complicated. In the hit series Schitt’s Creek, the main character engages in a conversation that perfectly balances the importance of openness and honesty in these conversations. This series follows a rich family of four who suddenly lose all of their money and their luxurious lifestyle. They are forced to pack up what is left of their property and move into a small town, their only remaining asset. Schitt’s Creek is the town that the father once bought the son as a joke for his birthday. That son and main character of the show is named David Rose. Presumably gay to the viewers and other characters in the show, he finds himself one night sleeping with a female and straight character named Stevie Budd. Stevie is confused, and decides to confront him while out wine shopping for an event. She hints, “Just to be clear, I am a red wine drinker, and I only drink red wine… and up until last night, I was under the impression that you too only drink red wine.” Catching on, David responds to her, “I do drink red wine. But I also drink white wine. I also have been known to sample Rosé. A couple summers back, I tried a Merlot that used to be a Chardonnay, it just got a bit complicated.” Stevie is a bit confused, and David goes on to say, “I like the wine, not the label. Does that make sense?” This iconic scene would go on to be quoted in many articles, printed on tee shirts, and used to give confidence to thousands of youth helping them come out to their parents and peers.


What is great about this use of a wine metaphor is how it is so unconventional, but so easy to comprehend. It allows even the most conservative and closed minded individual to understand that David is pansexual. And as a bonus- who doesn’t love wine? Everybody can relate to how David is describing to his sexuality through the use of this metaphor. David is able to bring forward his very complicated history of experimentation and self-discovery. He is so secure with himself and his journey, that he can calmly explain his sexuality to Stevie in an amusing way. David educates Stevie in a manner that is lighthearted but clear, and it is centered around inclusion and positivity. These conversations can be hard to have, but Stevie reacted in a way that let David come out to her while also not downplaying the importance of having “no labels” to David.

Society’s social constructs and biases make coming out a traumatic experience for so many people. How can they help not feel frightened at the possibility of having their loved ones turn on them for revealing their true self? Throughout every episode of Schitt’s Creek however, the creators challenged that idea that coming out needs to be traumatic. (As a disclaimer, they do not ever downplay the importance of that experience; having somebody working up that courage to finally be unapologetic and open with who they really are and love. There is an episode where David’s partner comes out to his parents in distress, but even then, his parents were only upset that he felt he couldn’t be honest with them about his sexuality, and not that he was actually gay.) By not making sexuality such a huge ordeal, it forces the viewers to imagine a world where there is no bias or judgment when two men are in love and holding hands in public. There is no talk among the characters of anybody’s sexuality beyond this scene, so the reaction to these couples is the same as any reaction would be to a heterosexual couple walking down the street holdings hands. This amazing directing is what sets Schitt’s Creek apart from other series. The series LBGTQ+ representation fosters an inclusive environment, free of bias and full of love and acceptance with no shame.  

Schitt’s Creek has made a difference in this world, right when we all needed it! It’s constant celebration of unconditional love and wholesome relationships between all of the characters really resonated with viewers, making it become one of the most popular and successful shows to ever hit the big screen. The series’ defiant representation of different races and sexualities throughout both acknowledge that facts that anybody in the audience who identifies with the characters are valid, and that they should be proud of themselves and love who they are. This show has won the battle of representation, and has helped pave the way in media for impenitent openness and inclusivity.

“We Raise Our Cups” to Anaïs Mitchell’s Hadestown

Posted on by Former Student

Written by Zoe Smithwick, for Autostraddle.com

When I think about a musical geared towards social justice and societal change, my first thought would not be about a depression-era retelling of a Greek myth. BUT, if I tell you that this same musical is entirely women-directed, inspired by cultural and political tones in modern society, and focused on shedding light on the application of age-old themes to current topics of discussion, I bet you would change your mind. After watching Hadestown, I was blown away by the ability to not only tell the classic story of Orpheus and his journey to retrieve Eurydice from “Hadestown,” but also the ability to resonate with many of the songs and emotions portrayed in the show.

Hadestown Broadway Trailer

To start, there is the attention to feminism in every aspect of the show. Anaïs Mitchell, a singer/songwriter, came up with the vision for Hadestown and wrote the music, lyrics, and book associated with it. The musical started off as a story told through an album that Mitchell was writing, which, with help from director Rachel Chavkin, became an off-broadway and finally a broadway and touring musical. The musical made headlines with Mitchell as the first woman in years to have sole credit on a Broadway show. 

Looking back to high school, who dominated the theater-kid scene? Overly-dramatic girls who always outnumbered the less-enthusiastic guys. Yet looking at the professional scene, it seems as though a majority of the main roles on Broadway and the majority of directors/playwrights happen to be male-dominated. It’s interesting to see such a shift in a field that is primarily more “feminine” to where the majority (as per-usual) is cishet white men. This shift impacts women so heavily because in creating an atmosphere where women are not even able to succeed in their stereotypical niche, how would they be able to break out of the shell of modern gender roles? Mitchell’s work allows for younger girls and women to be empowered by her bold leadership in such a male-dominated field, not unlike the movement for women in STEM. Some other shows with similar experiences of women leading the way have been covered in this New York Times article by Michael Paulson and this Bustle article by Leah Marilla Thomas.

Additionally, Mitchell’s creative choices in music allowed for the show to highlight the female vocal range (specifically catering to Eurydice and Persephone’s songs), while she made the male range the separate ends of the range (Hermes in the middle, Orpheus at the top, and Hades at the bottom). In doing so, she allows the female characters to have a strength and versatility that is not provided to the male characters, which reflects in their individual portrayals; Eurydice and Persephone are both strong figures in their relationships and hold a lot of power over their male counterparts, whereas Orpheus’ high range mimics his innocence while Hades’ low range presents his power-driven personality. 

In the video trailer above, at the 0:32 mark, you can hear an example of Patrick Page as Hades singing in his gravelly, seemingly unnaturally low voice, marking his love for Persephone and somewhat “claiming” her as his territory. At 0:24, you can hear Persephone’s objections to the intolerable conditions that Hadestown creates for everyone there, adding to her constant efforts to ameliorate Hades’ world. On the contrary, you can hear Orpheus’ song of desire at 1:25, calling out to Eurydice and saying that he will do essentially anything in his power to bring her back to be with him, even traverse the treacherous conditions of the underworld. Meanwhile, Eurydice sings her version of his song at 0:50, singing of her experiences in Hadestown and of her love for Orpheus. In singing her song, Eurydice asserts that she chooses her path, so after stepping away from Orpheus and voluntarily joining Hades in Hadestown, she is ready to return to her husband.

Even in the setting of the show (depression-era, coal-mining, steampunk-esque), the woman’s place is considered. The silencing of women by men and society as a whole is reflected in Eurydice’s and Persephone’s main conflicts being with men and with their powerless position in the ways of the world. By recreating the myth in such a setting, Mitchell was able to communicate the timelessness of the issues faced by each character. Hades’ character was based heavily on a capitalist, upper-class leader who, while his morals were “broken” in a sense, was constantly trying to get back on a path to win back his wife. Orpheus, an artist stuck in his own head, dealing with the dilemma of how to win back his wife and conquering any obstacle in his path to love. Eurydice, a poor girl, trying to find a balance between surviving and listening to the Fates who govern her every decision. Persephone, a woman who has seen how bad the world can be, struggling to maintain an acceptable life for everyone. The intersection between doing what it takes to survive in desperate times and living a life full of wonder and love, as seen in Orpheus’ and Eurydice’s drastically different characters. We can see this in our world today, looking at how the power-hungry upper-class rules the world, how the climate is changing and those who have the power to change it aren’t doing so, and looking at poverty and finding the balance between a life of struggle and a carefree philosophy. 

Works Cited

Browne, David. “The Hell With Broadway: The Story of Anais Mitchell’s ‘Hadestown’.” Rolling Stone, Rolling Stone, 22 Oct. 2019, www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/broadway-hadestown-best-musical-tony-anais-mitchell-842447/.

Brunner, Jeryl. “Hadestown Is A Broadway Musical Like No Other.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 29 July 2019, www.forbes.com/sites/jerylbrunner/2019/04/18/hadestown-is-a-broadway-musical-like-no-other/?sh=45e1beef4905.

Kallstrom, Megan. “Hadestown’s Tonys Triumph Was a Win for Women.” Slate Magazine, Slate, 11 June 2019, slate.com/culture/2019/06/hadestown-tony-awards-women-rachel-chavkin.html.

Sernaker, Emily, et al. “The Ms. Q&A: What Led Anaïs Mitchell to Hadestown.” Ms. Magazine, 15 Sept. 2020, msmagazine.com/2019/09/02/the-ms-qa-what-led-anais-mitchell-to-hadestown/.

Thomas, Leah Marilla. “Anaïs Mitchell’s ‘Hadestown’ Is Making Broadway History For Women – But She Wants It To Be Normal For The Next Generation.” Bustle, Bustle, 6 May 2019, www.bustle.com/p/anais-mitchells-hadestown-is-making-broadway-history-for-women-but-she-wants-it-to-be-normal-for-the-next-generation-17130069.», Dominique Rossi

Changing Gender Roles: Get Tattoos. Scare People!

Posted on by Former Student

Written by Patricia Raudales Calvario for Wear Your Voice/ https://www.wearyourvoicemag.com

The animated comedy The Simpsons is widely known by the media for “predicting the future.” Scenes from past episodes are scaringly connected to current events. Whether or not you believe this theory to be accurate, you will find many Simpson reference memes on social media. Scenes from the show have contributed to meme culture. The meme culture is rapidly growing on many social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram. People see memes everywhere, and the description following the meme, although used to entertain, can show a lot about society’s current views.  

“When she’s the one who’s tattooed” meme shows the fear of Homer Simpson (the person on the left) as his wife, Marge Simpson (the person on the right), leans over him with a seductive face. This interaction goes far beyond Homer and Marge; the facial expressions themselves depict gender roles in society. Although women are now empowered in all aspects of life (social, educational, political, and psychological), seeing a woman embodying more “masculine” traits still frightens many, as seen in Homer’s face. Women who show confidence and are assertive are considered more “manly.” Women can be confident but also need to spread warmth and bring joy to others. Rather than being strong, women are expected to be relaxed and easygoing. Anything that contradicts these ideas is quite scary to society. 

Beyond the facial expressions shown in this meme, the creator edited a tattoo sleeve on Marge’s arm to create his “When she’s the one who’s tattooed” meme. This meme is looked at, laughed at, and then people move on to the next meme. However, it is crucial to be aware that memes such as this one tell us a lot about gender roles and identity in society. Memes go beyond giggles and laughs. Memes have meanings and values. 

Why does Homer look afraid in this meme? A tattooed female is leaning over him. This meme does a great job of showing the perception of women and men with tattoos that society holds. When a man has tattoos, he is a “strong man,” a “brave man.” This is why this meme would have not been successful or considered funny if the roles were reversed. Although more and more women are now getting tattoos to represent the femininity and morals they hold, they are not always viewed as “strong women” or “brave women.”  Instead, women with tattoos are described as “aggressive” or “more masculine.” This meme shows how it has become more socially acceptable for a man to have tattoos than a woman. 

The type of tattoos put on Marge’s arm is also specifically picked, creating a more masculine image. A simple google search of “tattoos for women” and “tattoos for men” can show what type of tattoos are acceptable for each gender. For example, Marge’s tattoos would be found within a “tattoos for men” Google search. A simple “tattoos for men” google images search will suggest dark and more frightening tattoo ideas. Tattoos of skulls, fires, lions, snakes, and “king” phrases will be the first to come out. Googling “tattoo ideas for women” would give you the complete opposite: sweet and fragile ideas. Top suggestions would include flowers, hearts, and butterfly tattoos. Google searches for tattoos should be nothing more than inspiration and should not determine the tattoo you think would be the most socially acceptable. No matter your gender identity, get a butterfly tattoo, a skull tattoo, get both. 

Memes like the one described above are dangerous and can complicate people trying to understand their gender identity. A woman can wear “masculine” tattoos and still hold more feminine characteristics. A man can wear “feminine” tattoos and still have masculine features. Tattoos are now becoming more popular in American life. Our role is to dissociate ourselves with putting labels on the type of tattoo one chooses to put on their body.  

Tattoos can have personal meanings to some people, and to others just be a form of art put on their bodies. Tattoos are not gendered, and one should get tattooed with whichever design they desire. Tattoos can be hidden from the public view, or they can be exposed for everyone to see. Regardless, get whatever tattoo you want. Be as creative, bold, and SCARY with your tattoos. Be Marge Simpson and frighten society!         

Lesbihonest: Pitch Perfect is Not As Progressive As We Think

Posted on by Former Student

Written by Sarah Butchko for Autostraddle

Pitch Perfect, directed by Jason Moore and written by Kay Cannon, hit theaters in 2012 and has remained an iconic pop culture staple since. The movie follows the Barden Bellas, an all-girl acapella group trying to make a comeback after an embarrassing performance at the ICCA Finals the year before. While the group used to be composed of basic, white, acapella girls, the Bellas have become desperate to recruit a new team and end up taking in a group of misfits as the new Bellas. This could be a whole other discussion on the fatphobia, racism and plain bitchiness rooted in the recruitment of the Bellas, like how they have to “settle” for people who do not fit their prior standards of: white, skinny, and conventionally pretty. Back to the plot of the movie; the Bellas rival the Treblemakers, the all-male group on campus, and beating them at the 2012 ICCA Finals fuels their fire. Pitch Perfect takes the audience through the reinvention of the Bellas and the trials and tribulations of college acapella. There are many subplots in the movie, Beca and Jesse’s relationship, the enemies to lovers trope of Fat Amy and Bumper, and the not so subtle will-they-won’t-they of Beca and Chloe, to list a few. The movie has a cliche happy ending, Beca gets her man and the Bellas win the ICCAs. 

Although at first glance, the story is inclusive of different people and identities, with further consideration it uses these different identities as the butt of the joke and perpetuates harmful stereotypes. Comments and off color jokes about lesbians are heard throughout the movie. In the specific scene I am focusing on, the Bellas are going around and telling each other something that the others do not know about them. As Cynthia Rose is standing up to share, Fat Amy says, “I think we know where this is going, lesbihonest,” insinuating that Cynthia Rose is going to come out to them. Instead, she shares about her gambling problem that started when she broke up with her girlfriend. Fat Amy reacts saying, “Whoomp there it is,” as if it is such a huge deal that Cynthia Rose is gay. Prior to Cynthia Rose officially coming out to the Bellas, the group constantly makes comments suggesting that Cynthia Rose is lesbian. This pressure on Cynthia Rose to label her sexuality for the comfort of the others in the group relays a message to the audience saying that it is necessary to have a defined identity that others must be aware of. This continues the pressure of coming out in society and the idea that if you are anything but straight you must define it and let everyone know. This becomes harmful as the assumptions and judgements of Cynthia Rose from the Bellas may cause someone watching who is unsure of their sexuality and their definition of it to feel pressure to come out or define their identity. It can also create fear for the person watching that others are judging them and making assumptions about them. 

The first time the audience meets Cynthia Rose is at the audition for the acapella groups where she is misgendered because of the clothes she is wearing and the way she looks. The character who misgendered her, corrects himself saying “Whoop not a dude!” which is a joke that is supposed to entertain the audience. However, this “joke” perpetuates the gender binary in clothes, making it out of the ordinary when a woman expresses her gender in a way outside of the norm. The fact that the comment comes from a man makes it even more frustrating. 

Cynthia Rose, in her own words from Pitch Perfect 2, is “black, gay, and a woman.” This intersectional representation taken at face value can be seen as progressive and positive for the community, however, throughout the movie, Cynthia Rose is portrayed as a sexually aggressive black butch lesbian that keeps up a harmful stereotype about lesbians. She makes sexual comments and innuendos, and borderline sexually assaults Fat Amy, Stacy, and other characters. She repeatedly grabs Stacy’s boob and stares at her ass. When Fat Amy is hit by the burrito, Cynthia Rose jumps on her and attempts to give her “mouth-to-mouth” resuscitation which the audience can tell is not her true motive. These aggressive instances contribute to the butch lesbian stereotype that make hetero women wary- that the lesbian wants to get with you even if you are not interested. With the additional fact that not only is she an angry butch lesbian, she is an angry black butch lesbian, this representation becomes even more dangerous. My guess is that the producers did not intend to create this harmful character that perpetuates harmful stereotypes in society but with more attention paid to how this representation would come across could have made this movie a little less problematic. While it is important to have inclusive representation in media, representations that are not done well can be more damaging than not. 

Comment (Shea Bonacci)

I have watched the Pitch Perfect Movies so many times since they first came out. These are issues I never noticed or picked up on as a kid in the 5th grade. Reading through your post allowed me to walk through the movie with a completely different lens as a 20 year old. I like how you highlight that on the surface, most people view the movie as inclusive of different people and identities, but the irony is that those people are the butt of the joke. Assuming and expecting people to come out about their sexuality, the fatphobia present within the movie, the misgendering present, and the unrealistic representations of certain “stereotypes,” are all very present issues within the movies. Overall, great job!

Un-Defining Parenting

Posted on by Former Student
What are we taught to believe about motherhood? The stereotypical idealist view tends to be the birth of a child after marriage. Yes this view is one road to becoming a mother but there are so many others. Even today there is some stigma around certain types of births, many of these are addressed in the tv show Friends. Although this show does have some of its own issues, including its lack of diversity, it portrayed multiple ways of becoming a mother that may go against the norm. 

The first baby born in Friends was Ben, Ross and Carol’s son. Ben was an unexpected pregnancy; Ross found out his ex wife, Carol, was pregnant shortly after she left him for another woman. This birth was controversial in the 90s, not only were the parents not married (yet, Carol and Susan get married later in the show) but the baby had 3 parents. Although this sitcom was not perfect and incorporated many homophobic jokes, it was also one of the only shows at this time to feature a lesbian wedding. The show also did a decent job with their family relationship. Each and every family is unique, and we got to watch as Ross, Carol, and Susan figured out a new dynamic as they raised Ben. 

Phoebe Buffay, A badass hippie, was a surrogate to her brother’s children. Frank Buffay and his wife, Alice, had a very large age gap. Alice was Frank’s Professor in college and was over twice his age. Although their marriage was mostly used as a joke in the show, it did highlight and bring attention to age differences. When Phoebe first found out about their relationship, she was shocked but by the end of the episode came to the belief that love is love. Later in the show, Frank and Alice want to have a child but are unable to due to Alice’s age, so they ask Phoebe to be their surrogate. In the show they express the pregnancy and surrogacy well, but do make jokes such as when Phoebe tells the nurse at the hospital, “the father is my brother”. Many of these quotes are lighthearted. They bring up some of the harder parts of surrogacy such as carrying and birthing a child that is not theirs and having to give the babies to their parents. Ultimately the directors and writers wrote this story well and for the most part accurately portrayed the ups and downs of Phoebe’s decision. 

Rachel Green is from a very posh family in which she was raised to believe that her goals in life should be to marry a wealthy man and be a stay at home mother. This ideology was quickly challenged for her when she ran from her fiancé on her wedding day and then decided to get a job and become an independent woman. Later she also had an unconventional pregnancy for this era because she got pregnant and did not get married. Despite how she was raised and societal pressure from her family, she decided to have the baby on her own; Ross was still there to raise the child, but they were not together. At one point during a family convention, Ross’s mother even tells them to pretend they got married because they had been telling that to friends. Despite the pressure to get married by both their families, she still decided it was not the right time. And even though Rachel was not in a relationship to help raise Emma, she still had a ton of support from Ross, her family, and friends. She proved to many that you can be a single mother, work, date, and succeed, breaking many conventionalized beliefs. 

Monica Geller was one of the more heartbreaking stories. When her dream of having kids was put on hold because she had a hostile uterus and was unable to bear a child, she and Chandler started looking into other options and got into adoption. After being put on a list, they met a mother that agreed to let them adopt the baby when it was born. Although this process went by a lot faster than it normally would in real life, it still very accurately described this unconventional way of becoming a mother. 

All 7 babies born into this show either had unconventional births or family dynamics, but no matter the story they all had friends and family that supported their decisions. Recognizing that this sitcom did make many jokes that are viewed as offensive today, they were not seen as offensive in the 90s. The show incorporates these stories into their plot well, some may not even realize that all 4 main characters had unconventional stories. Even though this show was not perfect, it enforced the fact that there is no right or wrong to being a mother. 

Sex Education: Discovering Yourself During The Turbulent Years of High School

Posted on by Former Student

Written by Abby Yokoyama for Wear Your Voice | https://www.wearyourvoicemag.com

Sex Education is not only educating the students of Moordale secondary school in the UK, but its viewers worldwide too. Sex Education is a comedy-teen drama Netflix show all about sex, pleasure, and discovering your identity as a high school student. In their third season that just released, the show portrays people of different sexual orientations and gender identities and highlights their struggles and triumphs after a stark shift in administration. This blog post will analyze the new administration’s effect on the student body, as well as one of the prominent homosexual relationships present in season three.

Every school needs a sex therapist, right? Jean Milburn, the main character Otis’s mother, was just that for the students of Moordale, helping students become more comfortable with their sexual experiences, sexual orientation and addressing their concerns. The positive response from the students because of Jean’s help made headlines, making Moordale known as the “sex school”. In season 3, Jean has left, along with head teacher Mr. Groff, leaving new head teacher, Hope, with the sole desire of clearing the school of this title. 

Jean is pre-Victorian, and Hope is the Victorian response to sex. According to Foucault, people were very open and much more comfortable with sex up until the Victorian era. Moordale goes from sexual freedom and openness with Jean to school uniforms, single file lines, and an outdated, inaccurate video on sex education with Hope. Sex became shameful and frowned upon. It was discouraged and even against the rules to be spoken about aloud between students and faculty. Any traces of sexuality were to be destroyed or removed, including The Penis wall, which, you guessed it, is a wall full of drawings of penises.  

Hope publicly shames students during school assembly

Hope’s initiative to get rid of sex at Moordale lines up with Foucault’s repressive hypothesis. She is shutting down all the progress and work Jean had done with the sexual concerns the students had been having, and pushing that aside for “more important” matters. She wants students to focus all of their energy on getting good grades and doing well in school. Sex is nothing but a distraction. Nothing good comes of it. So she erases all traces of it. This is similar to how sexuality was repressed during the Victorian era and the rise of the bourgeoisie in order for capitalism to become the main focus. Hope represents capitalism. She is implementing rules and guidelines that repress any sort of sexuality so that school is the top priority. She even publicly ridicules those who are open about their sexuality and interests, like a new student, Cal, who identifies as nonbinary. Because of the new uniforms, they don’t know which one to wear, the one for girls or the one for boys. Hope has the answer! Because Cal was assigned female at birth, of course they must wear the girls’ uniform. This blatantly ignores and suppresses queer peoples’ identities and expression, but at least Moordale will look good in the press. 

Cal (left) with friend Jackson in front of The Penis wall

Moreover, the repressive hypothesis argues that power works in a top-down fashion, which is reflected in the school’s hierarchy. Hope is at the top as the head teacher, and she uses that power to overtake anyone’s voice below her. She silences the students, and not even the teachers are allowed to help with any personal issues they may be facing.

Another prominent aspect of his season is Eric and Adam’s relationship, consisting of two gay men in very different places in their lives. Eric is confident and outspoken about his identity, and doesn’t care who knows it. However, while Eric is very secure in himself at home in the UK, when he travels to Nigeria for a wedding, those around him, namely his family, want him to repress his identity. Homosexuality is illegal in Nigeria, so his family is not nearly as socially aware of it. His grandmother keeps asking when he is going to meet a nice Christian girl and get married, which Eric and his family know will never happen. At the wedding, he meets a gay man named Oba who takes him to an underground gay club. Inside, Eric finds a booming scene full of queer people, similar to the latter hald of the nineteenth century where D’Emilio explains that gay people created underground spaces for queer people. Eric feels the most liberated he’s ever felt in a country he shouldn’t really be feeling in such a way, which only strengthens his confidence in his identity. 

Adam (left) and Eric’s (right) budding relationship

Adam, on the other hand, is just starting to figure himself out and is having a particularly hard time embracing his identity. In earlier seasons, Adam was portrayed as a straight homophobe, and because he was repressing his own homosexuality, he bullied Eric. Adam also has a difficult relationship with his father, and was sent to military school at the end of season 1, where he meets plenty of other gay people. The military used to be a place of discovery for homosexuals during the wars, and while Adam did not uncover his homosexual identity while in military school, it is ironic that that is where he was sent in the midst of his journey in figuring out who he is as a gay man. When he comes back to Moordale, he attempts to become more comfortable with his sexuality so he and Eric can start a relationship, but Adam is not prepared for such publicity and vulnerability in his identity. Because of his relationship with his father and always being looked down upon and ridiculed by him, Adam is closed-off and rarely vulnerable, which is proving to be very difficult in trying to rebuild his reputation and identity from straight bad boy to gay man.

Sex Education is an effective means for important information for this generation; it’s a funny, but heartwarming, honest and educational show that conveys an important and relevant idea of discovering yourself and identity during a critical time. It is important to educate teenagers about sex and encourage finding you identity and being yourself, and this show does just that. By the end of the season, Hope is gone, but thankfully, The Penis wall remains.

A Fatphobic Lucky Strike Ad: Another Bad Side of the Tobacco Industry

Posted on by Former Student

Written by John Rogers for Jezebel.

This horrific ad was created by Lucky Strike cigarettes in 1930 as an attempt to sell their unhealthy product. It is no longer in circulation today (thank goodness) but it can be found online, and looking at it provides important history on how advertising has always been manipulative. The ad purports that Lucky Strike cigarettes will reduce feelings of hunger, leading consumers to be less snacky, and thus, presumably avoid tacking on weight from overeating. This ad is targeted towards women, since it features a woman in the picture, and it suggests that ladies can avoid weight gain by smoking cigarettes. In this way, the ad reinforces harmful gender norms that women must avoid being fat in order to be attractive to potential partners. 

The ad is not just sexist towards women by holding them to high beauty standards. It is also deeply fatphobic, meaning that it reinforces the idea that fat is ugly and must be avoided. According to Marilyn Wann, “health is a problematic concept when linked with weight. Health is not a number, but rather a subjective experience with many influences.” So, implying that a certain weight is unhealthy or undesirable, as this ad does, is a constructed idea that harms fat people. They are less self-confident, ostracized from society, and given worse health care as a result of this fatphobic thinking.

On top of some sexist and fatphobic tendencies, the ad is racist as well. It presents the skinny woman as white, and darkens her fat shadow. This reinforces the historical idea that fat is a Black quality, and that Blackness is bad just like fat. By presenting the white woman as the ideal, and the dark woman as the problem to be avoided, this ad upholds a racist ideal of white superiority.

The intended purpose of the ad is to sell cigarettes, and the ad hopes that preying upon women’s fears of being fat will impel them to buy the product that is offered as a solution to weight gain. It has another angle as well. It claims that the cigarettes will protect consumer’s throats from irritation and a cough.  It is ridiculous by our 21st century standards to smoke unhealthy cigarettes as a way to resist weight gain or clear your throat, but this was a clever argument at the time of the ad. Doctors were paid to claim that cigarettes were healthy, allowing Lucky Strike to prey on consumers with misleading data. In this way, the ad uses the rhetorical appeal of ethos by appealing to over 20,000 doctor recommendations to back up claims of health benefits from smoking.

The advertisement uses the rhetorical appeals of pathos and logos as well. The scare tactic of the “fat shadow” that could occur in 5 years if one engages in “over-indulgence” is intended to create fear in the audience, a fear that will be dissuaded by the supposed benefits of smoking Lucky Strikes. Thus, the images in the ad appeal to pathos. In terms of logos, the ad makes an argument that cigarettes lead to less hunger, and less hunger leads to less eating, and less eating will prevent weigh gain. Of course, this logic is faulty, because it assumes that less eating will prevent weight gain, even though this is an open question. It also assumes that weight is a choice that results solely from eating habits, which reinforces problematic fatphobic ideas that Wann references. Humans have weights on a bell curve, just like height or other characteristics, so picking a “skinny” ideal that is a specific spot on the bell curve is not only misguided, it is impossible to accomplish.

The ad has two images. One is a basic image of a cigarette box, intended to make the packaging look clean and appealing. The other image is of a thin, conventionally attractive woman with a fat shadow. The then woman looks happy and calm, while the fat shadow has more of a grimace on her face. This illustrates the argument of the ad: buy Lucky Strike cigarettes to reduce hunger, or else weight gain will inevitably follow from an inability to control urges to eat.

Overall, the ad tries to convince women to buy Lucky Strike cigarettes with two claims that are both tied to health – the cigarettes will prevent weight gain by reducing hunger pangs, and they protect people’s throats by eliminating irritation and coughing. The ad is an example of problematic advertising that uses fatphobia to encourage people to buy unhealthy cigarettes. Ads like these were used throughout history to promote sexist, racist, and fatphobic ideas, convincing consumers that products which were actually harmful to them would help them avoid these made-up problems. Examining this history of constructing false needs is vitally important so that we can identify where ads are using these tactics today and snuff them out.

A cigarette ad riddled with fatphobia, false science, and problematic beauty standards

Gay Tok: Hook-up Culture and Discrimination in the Gay Community

Posted on by Former Student

Tik Tok is home to a variety of trends from new dances to popular audios. There are many sides of Tik Tok, and you may be in multiple, depending on how diverse your ‘For You’ page is. However, I will be talking about a specific side of Tik Tok today, and this side of Tik Tok is referred to as Gay Tok (the side of Tik Tok created by and for the gay male community). There are innocent Tik Toks about gay couples on a date, but there are also videos that showcase the problematic side of the gay community. These short videos shine light on hook-up culture while other videos touch on the discrimination gay men of color face in the dating scene.

The first Tik Tok, created by @itslucasmorales, includes him sitting still in a room with the caption, “me remembering the time in high school where I thought I would find the love of my life on Grindr and ended up losing my virginity at 2am to some random guy in a tank top.” The audio in the background exclaims, “Don’t you feel silly, don’t you feel stupid, don’t you feel a little ashamed,” with an ominous sound playing in the background.

This short, twelve-second video shows the difficult dating scene gay teenagers face. The gay community’s dating pool is extremely small. Some people are closeted and not ready for a relationship, others are not queer, and some are already in relationships. The lack of a dating pool created a different pool within the gay community: hook-up culture. Younger gay people are thrown into hook-up culture through Grindr: a dating app intended for gay men. However, Grindr is used primarily to seek potential hook-ups instead of potential relationships. The way Grindr is used exposes teenagers to predators and potential grooming, which leads to gay teenagers engaging in sexual activities with older men. Early exposure to hook-up culture shifts gay teenager’s perception of relationships and their functioning. Instead of a relationship being seen as an emotional connection, it is perceived as a physical connection; gay teenagers will focus more on their bodies than their mental health.

The unhealthy, toxic atmosphere of hook-up culture perpetuates the idea that appearance, especially body shape, is a deciding factor in whether one deserves love or not. The fixation on bodies is deeper than expected. Each body type has their own category, such as twink (hairless, thin bodies) to otter (hairy, thin to athletic-build bodies) to bear (hairy athletic-build to larger bodies); there’s a category where any body type fits. This body categorization has been normalized to the point that there are quizzes, such as this one, to help identify your body type! Hook-up culture creates this body categorization and physical damage, but it also causes emotional damage. There are no emotional relationships. In hook-up culture, there are friends with benefits and sex with no strings attached. This goes back to the physical harm hook-up culture can cause with body fixation, but these issues also cause a mental toll on the person involved. The emotional aspect of relationships is not taken into consideration, making it difficult for gay teenagers to define a healthy relationship, especially if they are deeply involved in hook-up culture.

Hook-up culture is the root of most of the problems in the gay community. Hook-up culture leads to the creation of body categorization, physical over emotional relationships, and the use of preferences to justify discrimination in the gay community, which leads to my next Tik Tok.

The second Tik Tok involves a queer, black man talking about dating as a black person. This person discusses discrimination they have faced in the gay community from other black men. He starts his Tik Tok with the quote, “I’m getting to realize that I’m lowkey not in the mood to date black men anymore, and here’s why.” @Miamiboykhai explains the standards black men face in the gay community and the standards forced upon him. He mentions how black men have commented on his femininity, his skin tone, and his height in comparison to his position during sex, “What I’ve often heard towards myself was I was too feminine […] too dark while being feminine, and then I had people tell me I’m too tall for my position.”

Caption: @Miamiboykhai talks about the struggles he faces in the gay community when dating other black men

@Miamiboykhai discusses how the “outside world” already treats him differently, and now, he is ostracized from his own community. Many gay people feel out of place even within the gay community. They are treated differently due to their gender expression, body shape (as described in the first Tik Tok), and skin color. Grindr also plays a part into these standards. Many profiles have bios that exclude many people (no fats, no fems, no Asians), and the discrimination within the gay community creates an unsafe environment for people of color because of the intersectionality we face. Our cultures and religions are homophobic while the gay community is racist and discriminatory.

Another important argument this Tik Toker brings is, “[…] and I watch you guys pick and choose who you allow to be feminine, who you allow to date, you guys have many rules in the dating world as black people.” Femininity in the gay community is used to categorize gay people; it is associated with thinner body types, bottoms, and submissiveness. However, we need to move away from these stereotypes and realize femininity is a gender expression, and it does not dictate one’s position during sex, their likes and dislikes, or their behavior. Another thing that I should mention is that anyone can be feminine; it is not an exclusive trait reserved for people who are “allowed” to be feminine.          

So, what can we take from this? Tik Tok is a social media platform filled with a variety of genres and videos. The ones spoken about here display problems within the gay community in distinct ways. The first Tik Tok only used an audio and a caption, but it still made a strong point about the dating scene in the community, and it leads to discussing how the gay dating scene became what it is now. The second one was more of a rant, but it also showcased discrimination from someone’s personal experience. Tik Tok allows several people to discuss matters like this one, and it gives the younger generation some insight and information about several other issues in our world. In this case, we see how hook-up culture has perpetuated the idea that appearance, specifically body shape, dictates how desirable and valuable a person is and the assumptions that are made about a person through their gender expression.

Writing for Wear Your Voice | www.wearyourvoicemag.com

The Problematic Past of Barbie™️ Advertisements

Posted on by Former Student

Written for Feministing magazine.

Mattel’s advertisement from the 1960s.

The Barbie industry serves as an integral part of many young people’s childhoods and continues to be an influential brand. Up until these last two decades, the trademark has kept selling an item that lacks real representation- one that is appearingly not meant for everyone. One of the most notable red flags with this brand is the unrealistic model of body anatomy that is set before young generations. While recent strides to become a trademark that is known as more inclusive and empowering have been ongoing, there is still an entire history of wrongful messages and branding to be seen in order to account for its controversial narrative. 

A prime example (and one of many) is none other than the “Babysitter Barbie” ad, which includes the words “DON’T EAT” and features Barbie holding a book entitled “How To Lose Weight.” Mattel, the company behind the entire franchise, promotes a harmful lesson to an incredibly impressionable audience. A young person who comes across this graphic becomes instilled with the need to already be regulating an area of their lives in order to be seen as valid from the golden standard Barbie places. This becomes a confusing take on what is supposed to be a franchise dedicated to lifting girls up. 

Not only does this ad present a norm that should not be reiterated to a young group eager to view Barbie as a role model, but it reinforces poor beliefs regarding body image. Any advertisement that emphasizes a problem before one might even be aware can change someone’s entire perception of what is “socially acceptable” for them to look like. In this case, Barbie’s message can unknowingly kickstart unhealthy eating habits and overall insecurity, and young people may not be aware of the root of where it all began until much later.

The positive impacts the Barbie industry has had on its audience is not to be discredited; however, regarding topics of feminism, it can be noted that Barbie’s history of branding has not always been helpful to that cause. Luckily, Mattel has made strides in inclusivity and Barbies is much more aware today. It is essential that brands are conscious of the content they present to audiences, especially when it can negatively impact the confidence of young girls and their bodies. The Barbie franchise missed the mark on this one.  

You Gotta Love a Company That’s Sexist

Posted on by Former Student

Feministing – www.feministing.com

           During 2017 Super Bowl, Mr. Clean released an ad entitled “Cleaner of Your Dreams,” adding the brand to the growing list of companies using sex appeal to sell their product. In the commercial, a white, seemingly heterosexual woman – a wife named Sarah – is cooking and spills on the stove. Suddenly, Mr. Clean walks into the kitchen with a tight shirt revealing abs and a smug look on his face. He flexes his muscles as he squeezes out a sponge. Next, Mr. Clean begins to dance near, essentially on, Sarah. She then begins to dance in a sexual manner, suggesting that she is turned on by Mr. Clean’s cleaning. Finally, Sarah’s husband reappears, calling out “Sarah, Sarah!”, pulling her out of her trance. The viewer is meant to assume her husband was cleaning the entire time under the Mr. Clean fantasy. She becomes excited and runs to him, kissing him and pushing him onto the couch. This action conveys how a woman’s sexuality is used as a reward for a man’s ‘good behavior’, which to the stereotypical white housewife is helping her clean.

            While the “sex sells” rhetoric in television ads has a long history in the media and is not surprising, one would not think that the target audience for this ad, middle-aged women, would be attracted to this message. Not only does Mr. Clean’s ad include a man coming to a woman’s rescue, but it also reinforces the stereotype that is it not normal for men to be cleaning the home. The commercial ends with the couple having sexual relations on the couch as the screen blurs out, and the slogan, “you gotta love a man who cleans,” appears. While a woman is likely to appreciate her partner’s help in cleaning their shared space, this commercial portrays the activity of a man cleaning as an unusual, angelic behavior that women will yearn for.

            The music in the ad further works to portray this message. As Mr. Clean walks in, the music plays, “girl what you want, not what you need… be your fantasy … I’ll be your ecstasy”. The song choice blatantly makes clear Mr. Clean’s stance on the woman’s role in the home – her purpose is to clean, and she does not “need” a man to help her. She can only “fantasize” about a husband willing to clean. When he does help her to clean, however, it is so pleasurable it is comparable to a drug-induced high.

            On another note, Mr. Clean is quite sexualized himself. The purpose of his tight-fitting clothing and dancing is to arouse Sarah, as well as the target audience of middle-aged women. Comments by YouTube users following the video emphasize this point – one user commented “I’ve watched this an unhealthy amount of times”, while another said, “Oh no he’s hot”. While these comments are most likely jokes, they indicate that the commercial’s goal of making Mr. Clean into a sex symbol was successful. Another wrote, “I want someone to look at me the way Mr. Clean looked at Sarah”. Not only did Mr. Clean dance on Sarah and attempt to arouse her, but perhaps by cleaning and doing a chore she typically does, Mr. Clean made her feel seen and appreciated. It is inherently sexist, as well as symbolic of traditional husband and wife power dynamics, to presume a woman’s only desire is to feel appreciated by her husband for her work in the home. Where the commercial went wrong, however, was in assuming and suggesting that a woman’s immediate reaction to these emotions is to have sex with her husband. Perhaps the creators of the commercial accomplished their goal of creating a sexually attractive, ideal male body that catches women’s attention, but did they really reach the goal of selling their product to this audience?

            The commercial portrays a white, cis, heterosexual, presumably monogamous couple. The connection between white heterosexual couples and traditional husband and wife power dynamics could not be more obvious. As argued by Jonathan Katz in The Invention of Heterosexuality, heterosexuality has been the unchallenged societal norm of sexuality for most of history. After World War II, women were confined to the home and their work was limited to domestic tasks of caring for the family and home (Katz 237). Mr. Clean’s commercial supports the stereotypical role of women as the caretakers of the home and men as the breadwinners. Clearly the commercial creators do not agree with that time period’s conservative approach to sex which attempted to reconnect heterosexual sex with the purpose of procreation (Katz 237). In fact, the commercial encourages men to help their wives clean in order to be rewarded with sex. While the intended audience for this commercial may have been the middle-aged women, more specifically wives, Mr. Clean seemingly crafted this commercial with the entertainment of white, heterosexual husbands in mind. Thus, the sexualization of this commercial creates a disconnect people the intent of the ad and the experience of the viewer.

            The racialization of the commercial also works, perhaps unintentionally, to limit Mr. Clean’s audience range and customer base to the binary of being white and heterosexual. Representation of diverse relationships in terms of race, class, and sexuality would have extended the message of this ad to a greater audience. As a result, many potential customers may refrain from buying this product targeted at white, heterosexual, middle-aged women.

            As a company selling cleaning products, the Mr. Clean franchise should be well aware of the stereotypical, misogynic implications their commercial has for women. Not only are they selling their product, but also the ideals of the white, heterosexual traditional husband and wife dynamic with the wife as the caretaker of the home. Brands with influence in the media must stop establishing the standard that women must take on this role and reward their partners with sex. Rather, they should represent more diverse relationships, not only to reach a wider audience of consumers, but to also stop integrating messages of sexism, racism, and homophobia into everyday commercials.

“Mr. Clean | New Super Bowl Ad | Cleaner of Your Dreams – super bowl 51.” Youtube, 9 Feb. 2017. Web. 25 Sept. 2021.  <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozuWoZITX3Y>.

Katz, Jonathan. The Invention of Heterosexuality. New York: Dutton, 1995. Print.

Latest on Desperate Housewives: depiction of women with assumptions and stereotypes

Posted on by Former Student

by Yuncong Hu

Written for Autostraddle

Last week, Desperate Housewives just released episode 9 of season 3, named “Beautiful Girls” after the character Gabrielle Solis’s plotline in this episode. Since 2004, when its first season started airing on ABC, the show has been positively received for its exploration on the inner dark sides and complicated personalities of the ordinary upper-class housewives, in contrast to the traditional plain, dour mother/wife figures on screen. Surprisingly in this episode, Gabrielle’s story isn’t technically boundary-breaking, and instead, it is borderline-misogynist.

For those of you who haven’t watched Desperate Housewives, Gabrielle Solis is one of the four female protagonists, all of whom are close friends and neighbors living in a fictitious suburb are called Wisteria Lane. Gabrielle has a Mexican heritage, and the other three housewives are white. In S309, Gabrielle’s divorce is finalized. With the failed attempt to go back to her modeling career in last episode, Gabrielle accepts the fact that she is becoming an unemployed divorcée. In need of a distraction from her empty life, she accepts invitation from her gay personal shopper, Vern, to coach young pageant girls for his new beauty pageant consulting firm. While she reluctantly takes the offer, she later finds herself enjoying coaching the girls as her modeling expertise is incredibly idolized by these younger women. However, when she is reminiscing on her old modeling days, she accidentally tells the girls about some ill-advised weight-loss methods such as sticking fingers in throats and smoking. Later on, some girls are caught by their parents smoking and vomiting, and Gabrielle is fired. She then comes to the mothers of the girls, confesses to them that beauty pageant coaching is now the one single meaningful thing in the life of a woman without husband and family, and makes a subtle offer to give illegal diet pills to them. The parents give her a second chance.

It is noticeable that Gabrielle’s conversation with the girls in this particular scene demonstrate how fat stigmatization is socially institutionalized in popular culture. Specifically, Gabrielle starts with the warning “You would not believe all the horrible things model do to stay skinny” and “I never did it” before she introduced the kids into smoking and vomiting as weight-loss methods. The children, though aware of “smoking will kill you”, still ask “Do you have to be skinny to be a model?”, to which she answers, “When was the last time you saw a fat person on a magazine cover?” This is a highly representative example of anti-fat beliefs being passed on by someone elder and experienced to a younger generation, thereby creating an invisible social structure that is constantly renewing and strengthening itself. In her introduction to Fat Studies Readers, Marilyn Wann comments on this structure, “Every person who lives in a fat-hating culture inevitably absorbs anti-fat beliefs, assumptions and stereotypes, and also inevitably comes to occupy a position in relation to power arrangements that are based on weight,” The power relationship in this narrative is clearly the contrast between professional fashion models and some 9-to-12-year-old who wish they could be beauty pageant girls. As a result, Gabrielle herself, without realizing it, teaches the girls about the established beauty standard that discriminate against fat people. Her expertise, just like the enormous power of social norms behind beauty standards, is invisible and very restrictive, as the girls immediately accepts the norms and attempt to fit into them. Even worse, when she acknowledges that the methods she mentions is “horrible”, she is also explaining the conventional rules for fat people, that they need to suffer to lose weight, that being fat is even more dreadful than being unhealthy. These rules are internalized by the girls and soon, they start to punish themselves for being fat.

There is more to the fatphobia side of this episode. While it gives us an example of how fat-stigmatization transforms into social structures, it fails to offer any critical resolution towards it. This presentation of this story, which primarily focuses on weight and beauty standards, chooses to continue conforming to anti-fat beliefs and misrepresenting fat community. In the last scene, a sharp contrast is made between Gabrielle and the parents:

Eva Longoria, as Gabrielle, is intentionally put into better clothes, hair, accessories and make-up in this scene, while the other actors are clearly not. Gabrielle is wearing a full-length, Versace-styled ball gown while holding a clutch. Her hair is curly and silky, and she has full-makeup on. The other ladies are all wearing dowdy clothes, much less make-up and three of them can definitely be considered as fat. These women quickly changed their idea about firing Gabrielle after she mentions she has “highly effective non-FDA approved diet pills from Zurich”, and claim that “I guess the Christian thing is to forgive her” without admitting that they are attracted by the pills in reality. The plot and lines intuitively assume the beauty standards between two binaries – fat and thin, and coveys the implied message that thinner people do look better to its audience. Moreover, it falsely represents fat people by portraying them as automatically desiring losing weight at any cost. Therefore, it inevitably represents another effort to normalize weight-loss and anti-fat health promotion by making an assumption that fat people need to lose weight. In doing so, they neglect the group of audiences who belong to the self-accepting fat community.

In addition, the underlying assumption about Gabrielle’s social class is striking. She is a wealthy woman who can afford a personal shopper even after losing her steady income – her ex-husband. Her motivation for this job is not for survival, but only spiritual fulfilment. Just like Gabrielle, her other friends share the same social class and work motivation: they are married to lawyers, doctors, managers, etc. Essentially, the depiction of women’s struggle is mainly about upper-middle class, white women’s struggle (Gabrielle is the only POC protagonist in the show) A vast majority of women are already excluded in the production of this episode, as well as the whole series.

As the only non-white protagonist, the character of Gabrielle also indicates conformity to racial and gender stereotypes prevalent in America. She is undoubtedly, even in the script description, the most attractive housewife of all four, and a Latina ex-supermodel. There is a hyper-sexuality attached to her with her race, a form of over-sexualization of Latin women. The character has no choice but to be a gorgeous stereotype like a lot of other Latin women on screen, while diversity is allowed in white women. The same thing is applied to Gabrielle’s background. She is the only one who has a background story: she comes from a poor family, goes into modeling at a very young age, earns a new life through her new social circle, marries a rich husband and retires from fashion industry. Interestingly, Desperate Housewives does not introduce the backgrounds of other three white protagonists. They are assumed to be raised, educated and married normally as if they are in a standard white family, while Gabrielle needs an explanation of why she lives in a rich, white suburbs neighborhood. In other words, The abnormality in the life of a female, like Gabrielle, is highlighted and associated with her racialized background.            

Above all, the series Desperate Housewives does have many things to complement about: it gives a space for more female-centered narratives in the male-dominating media world, and it strives to tell stories from women’s points of view. Still, one must not neglect the problematic assumptions and stereotypes of women that it displays in only one episode. The production team need to inspect its work with more consciousness of preventing prejudices and assumption. And the audiences, while enjoying the marvelous episodes, should be aware of these problems.

Works Cited:

Wann, Marilyn. Foreword To Fat Studies Reader. NYU Press. 2009

Why can only white men drink beer?

Posted on by Former Student
A Budweiser beer advertisement from the 1950s

What do you first think of whenever you look at this ad? Budweiser is a very popular beer company, so it particularly stands out. When I first looked at it, I thought to myself “Hmm, this advertisement is probably from the 1900s”. Budweiser created this advertisement in the 1950s and the intended audience of it seems to be pretty clear: white men. The purpose can also be quite clear: sell Budweiser beer to white men. These are the things you can decipher when you just take a slight glance at this advertisement. 

As you dive deeper into the symbolic art that is presented in the advertisement, these things unearth more purpose and intention from the advertiser. Let us talk think about and analyze the actions of the two people in this ad. For instance, looking at the white man, he holds a hammer. As he is holding this hammer, it seems he is working hard on building something and we can assume this is either something for home or it is a part of his job. When looking at the white woman who we can assume is his wife, she is pouring him a glass of Budweiser beer. There is nothing hardworking about what she is doing, she is just simply acting upon her husband’s needs. This image sparks more controversial topics. In the 1950s, they would say “Well that is the role of a women, isn’t it?”. They would assume that the role of the women is to take care of her husband and fulfill all of his needs. Whenever we compare these two actions of the man and the woman, it really reflects those assumed and assigned gender roles that society claimed to be “right” in the 1900s. The typical woman staying at home, tending to her husband, the breadwinner. In contrast, the husband is the hardworking spouse in the relationship who has a job, does the “handyman” work at home, and acts upon all the “masculine” things society expects him to do. Just by looking at the actions of the two in the ad, it easily already brings those gender assumptions to the audience’s minds. However, when looking at the advertising techniques of Budweiser, you can question them on why they ignited these prominent gender roles in the ad. Well, since it was the 1950s, it was assumed that after a long day of hard work, men needed to decompress, so their wives could pour them some Budweiser beer at the end of the day. 

These points can also be proven by the facial expressions of the man and the woman in the advertisement. By the looks of the man’s face with his wrinkled forehead lines and his subtle yet irritated facial expression, he seems to be stressed out and tired from a long day of labor and responsibilities. Let’s remember, the 1950s were times when gender roles were prominent. Where the golden standard was the men working and laboring during the day while the women stayed at home with the children. So, because men are stressed out at the end of the day, this is why Budweiser aims at this audience of white men who have jobs. Budweiser tries to convince you that alcohol, specifically their beer, will help you decompress and relax at the end of the day. Now, looking at the intended audience of the advertisement, it sparks conversation on the assumptions of gender roles. For example, why is Budweiser assuming that only white men drink beer? Why can’t they advertise it to women or even non-white men? This question does have an obvious answer which has to do with the time that the advertisement was released, however, this only shows how prominent these gender stereotypes and standards as well as racial issues were during the 1950s. It shows how companies and businesses convinced society that men have specific roles and women have specific roles. It shows how there was so much assumption on what race was superior during the time and which were inferior. Moving on, let’s start looking at the women pouring the Budweiser beer for who we assume is her husband. She looks so content while pouring the beer. She looks as if she has no problems in this world. That may be true, or it may not be. Budweiser is trying to convince the audience that since it is the 1950s where women are at home while men are working during the day, the least they could do for their hardworking husbands is pour them a glass of Budweiser beer. Budweiser is trying to force these couples into these roles in order to advertise their product.  

Looking back at the advertising strategies that Budweiser tried to use, it may have been effective during the 1950s. However, that does not make it necessarily “right” to advertise in the first place. When people look at the advertisement in modern time, there are so many gender, racial, and class issues within the ad. However, we can learn to appreciate that advertisements such as this one was produced in history, because we can now analyze them and learn from them. That is the major takeaway we can obtain from media that occurred a long time ago, and that is what we need for social justice. 

Writing for Feministing / www.feministing.com

Celebrities: That Doesn’t Look Like Me

Posted on by Former Student

With social media, more specifically editing tools like photoshop, at the tips of everyone’s fingers, being a teenager today is hard. There is a constant feed of images that have been altered to fit society’s misconstrued beauty norms: airbrushed skin, whitened teeth, any ounce of fat pinched in or smoothed out. These images, mainly of or posted by celebrities, generate unrealistic expectations that collide with the very foundation of what it means to be human: having blemishes, curves, and for goodness sakes – everyone has fat on their bodies – it is normal. This “standard of beauty” often goes uncontested, but known body positivity advocate and celebrity, Zendaya, had no problem taking a stance against the editing done to one of her own modeling photos for Modeliste Magazine.

In the screenshot above, you are able to see not only the two images she has juxtaposed, but you can see her caption, likes, comments, and even how many followers she has. I think it’s safe to say that at 108 million followers, she has quite an audience and at 839,310 likes, that her post was well-received. The right image in the post is the beautiful, unedited image of Zendaya. She is wearing a black leather jacket with high-cut bottoms that flatter her curves and she is working a subtle, soft smile with her curled hair framing her face nicely. This gorgeous image makes it puzzling that someone would even think that there are aspects of it that need to be “perfected.” Yet, thanks to what society has falsely deemed as “beautiful,” the image was edited (left). By placing these two images side by side, it makes it glaringly obvious that multiple things have been “touched up.” Starting with the most noticeable, her skin has not only been airbrushed, but a filter has been placed over the initial image, altering both Zendaya’s skin tone and hair color. Next, editors have made her hair “smaller,” by pinching it in closer to her face and flattening it out. Another evident edit is that her waist and hips have been made smaller. 

The irony in the photoshopping of this photo is that Modeliste Magazine prides itself as being an authentic source for emerging fashion and beauty trends. However, their heavily retouched photos of Zendaya scream many things – none of those things being authentic or along the lines of what “beauty trends” should be. In addition to the way Zendaya juxtapositioned these two images, her caption speaks volumes regarding her important message. At 19 years old, she describes her shock, having images posted of herself with the realization that they did not look like her at all. She quickly noticed that her hips and torso had been altered (as she describes in her caption) and points out that “these are the things that make women self conscious, that create the unrealistic ideals of beauty that we have.” She then goes on to explain how important it is for her to represent “honest and pure self love.”

While Modeliste later took down the edited images and worked with Zendaya on publishing the complete unedited images, I think that there are multiple take-aways from Modeliste’s initial publication and Zendaya’s response. The magazine’s initial publication speaks volumes not only of society’s need to take away the uniqueness within beauty through photoshopping, but also the beauty norms that are implied as a result of this photoshopping. It implies that there is a standard for beauty and that the standard is thin, airbrushed, and lacking a single imperfection. As a result, people often don’t feel good enough and if we cannot feel at home in our own skins, where else are we supposed to go (Wann)? The amazing thing about beauty is that there is no standard. Zendaya makes it clear through both her post and caption, that beauty is more about self love and being real. Beauty is fat and thin and happy and natural with blemishes and so many other things. Beauty is all encompassing and inclusive. Photoshopping within these large platforms try to make beauty small and singular, whereas it is something that is limitless due to the diversity within the world we live in. Additionally, Zendaya’s response was empowering – not only for her, but for everyone who looks at social media and is overwhelmed by unattainable and unrealistic beauty norms. She makes it clear to her audience that the real her is beautiful and does not need to be edited. Her post radiates body positivity and breaks down the walls that confine beauty to be a singular thing. 

Works Cited

“Fashion Trends, Celebrity NEWS, Influencer STYLE, Beauty Tips, Luxury Travel.” Modeliste Magazine, 8 Sept. 2021, https://modelistemagazine.com/. 

Wann, Msrilyn. “Fat Studies: An Invitation to Revolution.” Fat Studies, pp. Forward XV. Zendaya. “Instagram.” Login • Instagram, 2015, https://www.instagram.com/zendaya/?hl=en.

Zendaya. “Instagram.” Login • Instagram, 2015, https://www.instagram.com/zendaya/?hl=en.

The Fresh Prince Takes a Future Look into Fatphobia

Posted on by Former Student

Written by Trey Messer with Autostraddle, 1991

Scenes from Fresh Prince of Bel Air Season 2, Episode 8: She Ain’t Heavy

The hit sitcom The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air has been a blessing to our eyes as we watch Will Smith work his magic, entertaining the audience with his wittiness and colorful nature, as well as addressing some important issues that Black people in America face such as racial profiling, gun violence, and the struggles of growing up in rough neighborhoods. Season 2 looks to continue to this trend with new episodes tackling other issues of our society. In Season 2, Episode 3, the Fresh Prince is forced to address his own flaw of body shaming, an ideology that many men (including myself) struggle with resisting.

Throughout Season 1, the sitcom makes it clear that Will’s character is undoubtfully a ladies’ man. The “She Ain’t Heavy” episode even includes a flashback of all the fine honeys that Will has gone on blind-dates with—black, beautiful, elegant, but most noticeably, skinny. As Will gets excited to see who his potential blind date will be to the Lakers basketball game, his expectations are far from met when hip-hop artist and actress Queen Latifah walks through the door of the Banks residence. Latifah, who plays the role of “DeeDee” in this episode, is noticeably plus-sized compare to Will’s previous female acquaintances. The cameras cut to Will standing in shock and disbelief (in the comedic way only he knows how), serving as an slight at her body. The insults get worse when Will comes up with the excuse not to go to the game with her, stating that she wouldn’t fit in his packed car. He immediately realizes the fault in his words and recovers with “Not just you, anybody.” The scene ends with DeeDee walking out after telling Will and Carlton that she planned to be screaming her number at NBA superstar Magic Johnson, which Will replies behind her back: “I hope Magic ate his Wheaties.”

As the episode progresses, Will and DeeDee bond over their shared sense of humor and common interests, but Will is too afraid to ask her to the dance knowing that his friends make fun of him for hanging out with her. As they are seen in a restaurant together, Will’s classmates suggest she is “tons of fun” and even claims “the babe got more buns than a day-old bakery”. Will then asks his friend the question: “Now how you trying to play me? Now you’ve seen the honeys that I had up in here”. DeeDee, eavesdropping, hears this and storms out. The two end up going to the dance with separate dates, have a horrible time, and eventually make up. The crowd got one last laugh, however, when the king bed collapses in the final scene as every character sits on it watching a home cooking show. As funny as it was watching it the first time through, I’ve realized that the episode portrayed many important issues regarding society’s assumptions about weight and our social interactions with people we define as “fat”.

Scenes from Fresh Prince of Bel Air Season 2, Episode 8: She Ain’t Heavy

To start, the jargon and jabs used in the episode are very relatable to the reality to our assumptions about fat people. Euphemisms like “heavy”, “big”, and “husky” are substituted for fat in conversations, giving a “false positive spin on a negative view of fatness”. For those who use such words, they try to convince themselves by placing positive connotations on the idea, but the truth is they do not find it as acceptable. The fat synonyms also change the focus of the word, ultimately changing the relationship to one’s body. “Obese” and “overweight” –what Marilyn Wann would call the O-words—puts a medical gaze on the body, convincing people that being fat is something that is medically fixable (assuming that it’s a problem in the first place, rather than just being a bodily difference and variation).

The reason fat jokes and slander is so popular today is because of the power structure that we are subconsciously participating in through societal norms and expectations. In Wann’s foreword to “Fat Studies: An Innovation to Revolution” she claims, “Every person who lives in a fat-hating culture inevitably absorbs anti-fat beliefs… also inevitably comes to occupy a position in relation to power arrangements that are based on weight”. Weights and body shapes, effortlessly, assign women rank in the social hierarchy as the standards of “body goals” continues to become skinnier waist and wider hips.  When people don’t live to such expectations, we ignore, shame, bully, and ostracize them for not conforming to the standards that we force ourselves to do. The power we exercise to separate ourselves from those below us in the hierarchy is what Michel Foucault calls “productive power”—shaming others in attempt to encourage them to change their ways of living to improve their social status. In this perspective, corporations practice productive power by encouraging weight loss programs, expensive dieting, and weight loss medication.            

What makes this episode of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air so unique is how ahead of its time it is. Body positivity is relatively a new concept that gets confused with fat activism, which is barely even an ideology at this point. While body positivity encourages us to accept who we are and “love ourselves”, fat activism will force the public to stop discriminating against bigger bodies and to accept them for who they are. The episode effectively shows how we shouldn’t focus on the body or size of people we get into relation with, but more so emphasize compatibility and personality that we desire. Will Smith and the rest of the writers of the show reveal their agenda of promoting change and education to an audience swarmed by the anti-fat beliefs of society. I hope to see more episodes like this that continue to challenge my own understanding of the world and how it affects the relationships around me.

What is Mick Fleetwood’s Obsession with Balls?

Posted on by Former Student
Fleetwood Mac’s Rumors Album Cover

It’s been almost 50 years since the release of Fleetwood Mac’s Rumors (1977), but this album is still as popular as ever. From song versions sung by the Glee cast to a viral TikTok trend involving cranberry juice and “Dreams,” teenagers and adults alike fangirl over this influential record. They live for the drama, the ethereal energy, and the tack piano. But why, oh why, is there a pair of balls dangling between Mick Fleetwood’s legs, and who draped Stevie Nicks across Fleetwood like a damsel in distress? This blog post is an analysis of the album cover to Fleetwood Mac’s magnum opus and what it says about power dynamics between genders. 

If you’ve ever watched Superman, you know how much power superheroes exude solely from their stances. On the Rumors album cover, Mick Fleetwood stands tall and proud, one foot resting on a stool. His chest is proudly stretched, and his hand rests firmly on his hip. He’s set in place, grounded as he holds a crystal ball. On the other hand, Stevie Nicks is anything but steady. Her body is positioned closer to the floor, and her arm flexes behind her as if she’s turning (or possibly falling). She lacks balance, utilizing Fleetwood’s leg for support. At first glance, their stances are nothing to consider. However, this contrast of poses creates a clear power dynamic between Fleetwood and Nicks: Fleetwood is an object of power while Nicks floats along with little structure, reliant on Fleetwood’s body. These same power dynamics have dominated modern-day family and economic systems. During the 1950s, the cult of domesticity established the prevailing trend of male breadwinners. Even today, men are still seen as financial providers and political leaders of whom women are in desperate need. 

Along with posture, the juxtaposition of masculinity and femininity is apparent in Nicks’ attire. Nicks dons a black flowy shawl and is dressed as Rhiannon, the Welsh witch known from the song of the same name from Fleetwood Mac’s eponymous 1975 album. Throughout history, witches have been one of the most widespread images of female empowerment and resistance to patriarchal norms. Persecution of witches has existed as early as the creation of the Bible; the witch trials in The United States (most famously Salem, Massachusetts) and the United Kingdom merely dispersed witch hysteria throughout the world. Witch hunts often punished powerless women who were on the fringes of society: women of color, women that spoke against the man, outwardly sexual women, etc. Essentially, women – generally speaking, people – that didn’t conform to expectations set by society and the patriarchy were susceptible to being charged with witchcraft. Witchcraft’s connection to the feminine is also apparent in a witch’s connection to nature. While nature isn’t necessarily feminine, much of the discourse around women and motherhood connects to the Earth. Furthermore, women and the Earth alike have been subject to much exploitation, oppression, and destruction. Witches communicate with these forces of the environment, blurring the line between humans and nature. Now, what does this have to do with Stevie Nicks or Rumors? For much of the ‘80s, tabloids and haters alike speculated that Stevie Nicks was a witch. Rather than run from these harrowing accusations, Nicks embraced the identity – she embraced Rhiannon. Nicks even appeared on American Horror Story as the “White Witch.” She became this mystical, feminine icon in the male-dominated genre of rock, a “fuck you” to both the industry and patriarchy. This begs the question: if Nicks is a model of feminine power, what does the Rumors album cover say about the relationship between man and woman? Why is Fleetwood holding a crystal ball, Rhiannon’s median of art? Has he taken it, are they sharing it? Why is Fleetwood towering over Nicks, positioned as if he’s Captain Morgan overpowering the feminine? Is he part of the witch hunt? Expanding on the analysis of their gender dynamics from their posture, the cover art suggests an imperial conquest of wild and unruly women, i.e., witches. 

The last narrative piece that brings this analysis full circle is how Fleetwood himself is accessorized: with a pair of balls that hang below his pelvis. Why is it so crucial that Fleetwood reminds not just Nicks but the listeners (and therefore the world) of his genitals? The answer to this question is simple. He wants everyone to remember that he has balls. He wants his power as a man – as a person with a penis and testicles – to be known. We live in a world where power systems predominantly benefit those with one set of genitalia, so images related to testicles or phallic symbols can also be correlated to potency and strength. Today, we see phallic imagery in areas related to power, such as swords, rockets, skyscrapers, and cigars. These images create a subconscious association in our minds with hegemonic masculinity, a constant reminder of who and what is in charge. Similarly, Mick Fleetwood’s balls generate a reminder of his position in society and in relation to Rhiannon.  

Does this mean you should stop listening to the silky melodies of Fleetwood Mac? Absolutely not – I’ll always need my daily dose of Stevie! However, you should study and recognize the many messages the cover art delivers. Rumors has one of the most recognizable album designs of all time, so dissecting images that circulate pop culture is vital to understanding the social contexts in which we live. That being said, the next time you add “Songbird” to your Spotify queue, analyze the different stories hidden within the album cover and question any resemblances to your own relationship to gender and power.

Written by Anaya Patel with Autostraddle