Tag Archives: sexualization

Caroline Woziacki Imitates Serena Williams

Hiya Poutlings!

Today, in things that one should not do when playing a live televised tennis match: stuff your front and back to appear that you have big boobs and a big backside.

After doing this, the Danish tennis player Caroline Woziacki has been accused of racism after she did this on the court the day before yesterday, apparently mimicking her fellow women’s player tennis Serena Williams. Caroline Wozniacki was playing a game in Sao Paolo, Brazil against Anna Kournikova. She played for a minute or two dressed like that and the audience went ballistic cheering before she pulled the towels out. You can watch the video of this

Some people see this as just a goofy joke, especially since Caroline and Serena are supposedly friends – how good of friends, who knows, who cares, whatever.

Jay Busbee from Yahoo Sports put it perfectly :

“This is an era where no jokes goes unscrutinized, and no humour apparently exists without sinister subtext … An apology may be forthcoming, but it shouldn’t be.”

Others are saying it was a racist imitation because it was highlighting the extreme sexualization of women of colour’s bodies.

Now, unfortunately, we live in a world where something can be racist regardless of the person’s intent – this chick may be friends with Selena Williams and may not have intended to do something racist. But that doesn’t mean what she did was not racist. On the other hand, my inital reaction to Caroline Wozniacki’s behaviour was that it was first and foremost unprofessional. She’s in the middle of playing a tennis match, for !#@% sakes. Then, when I read she was imitating Serena Williams, my next thought that mocking the size of her boobs and backside was a bit cruel on live television…

I am all for good natured rivalry among friends, making fun of someone’s sexualized body parts during a televised match is a bit much.

Once I read upon the controversy, I never thought the act was “racist”, however, the “sinister subtext” that Jay Busbee referred to – was not obvious to me at first glance. I would also imagine that people defending Caroline’s actions are saying its not a big deal.

wozniacki

Ultimately, however, I feel it’s not my final call as a white women to decide whether or not this is racist. Stupid – yes. Racist – up for debate. It’s a time to listen what people who are directly affected are saying : if people of colour are saying this mimicry was racist and problematic then we should listen.

…do you have any thoughts on this?

*missfitz

7 Comments

Filed under Celebrities, Daily Banter, Media, What not to do...., WTF

Natalie Portman’s DIOR Mascara Advert Banned In The UK

Hiya Poutlings

Photoshop doesn’t really bother me that much. I am a photographer, I know what photoshop I like and what I don’t. In advertising of beauty products, it is annoying but undeniably rampant practice for sure, but at this point, I always think “nobody looks like that” and “the proof is the pudding, just buy it and test it out” – which can be an expensive practice as a makeup artist too. It’s got to the point where the general public without a knowledge of photoshop know what is real or not and I’m apathetic to that, apart from beauty advertisements! Are we seriously supposed to look at these pictures and say “wow, this foundation looks great” when the model has been subjected to hours of professional hair and makeup but has also been Photoshopped to the point of no recognizable human features?

For reference to my above statement, open any fashion magazine to any page selling a cosmetic brand or product, bonus points if its a well known celeb. Does she look like a woman wearing makeup or does she look like a woman-alien hybrid who is wearing makeup also eigh hours worth of post-production photo enhancement and might also slurp out your soul to steal your youth?

What is the purpose of photographic advertising if it has virtually nothing to do with the product being advertisted?

So, heres the deal, in the States (and generally the rest of the world follow them like sheep, BAA), they turn a blind eye to this type of consumer manipulation. In the UK, they answer it with Advertising standards Authority, which is exactly as it sounds. The Authority addresses everything from over-sexualization, such as Dakota Fanning’s underage advert for Marc Jacobs and extreme thinness to the very sort of dishonest, aspirational punting that occurs in said beauty adverts. They’ve cracked down on adverts featuring Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington in the past, and their next target is Dior Diorshow mascara starring Natalie Portman.

OH LOLA, Dakota Fanning for Marc Jacobs was deemed too sexual

Model, Christy Turlington & Julia Roberts – both women in their 40s. not the dewy, fresh-faced nymphs these ads for Maybelline and Lancome would have you believe.

The latest banned advert, Natalie Portman for DIOR.

The advert which is now banned is egregious in its use of capitalized emphasis, FALSE EYELASHES to advertise MASCARA. Taken at face value, it’s a beautiful image that I don’t mind looking at, but really, don’t you think it’s an insult to our collective intelligence as human beings that brands actually pull this kind of bullshit? Ever more disturbing… the general public fall for it.

Think about it.

That’s all I’m saying.

*missfitz

2 Comments

Filed under Advertising, Beauty, Celebrities, Designers, Eyebrows, Eyelashes, Fashion, Makeup, Media, Mistake, Models, Photography, Products, Retouching, Skin