13 Examples of the Profound Photography of Boris Hoppek - (***NSFW***)

Not pornography, yet you're still about to view some extremely graphic and jarring imagery from the masterful German, Barcelona based, contemporary artist Boris Hoppek so please use personal discretion when reading further.  Hoppek's originally a graffiti artist but he's since blossomed into creating digital and installation art.   No small wonder is it, that he's somehow bridged the ability to submerge the voyeur fully into an all encompassing photograph, that contains a carefully constructed scene that can equally enrage and sadden, as well as disgust and disturb.

When initially reviewing this site I had thought that some prolific artist figured out an ingenious way to take photographs of women naked because whatever Google search I had done lead me to like photo #47 or something.  But there were SO MANY photographs underneath the intriguing header of "just the plain accurate artwork, seriously!!  Photos showing women with problems or just being beautiful", I started at #1 and quickly changed my mind.

"What kind of 'problems' did this (obvious) man think women have?,"  I wondered while scrambling towards the little pink en-squared one to click it.  I think by #8--which will be showcased here as number one--women problems became real apparent.  Out of all 48 photographs, I want to focus on 17 of them and share them with you.  Now.  Like, right, now.    

#1.)  Was Really Number Eight - 'Behind Table B-Side'

NOT sex.  Or sexual or sexualized, instead, this is dismissive, this is an exposed woman featured as furniture, as a chair.  This is a stark contrast compared to the other S&M mannequin chair that was a literal fetish to sit upon.  This is more.  This makes me wonder why so many women love the home design shows, I'm just as guilty of loving them, do some of us obsess over controlling our interior exteriors of living-rooms and kitchens as a form of compensation for the loss of control in society at large?  Is it a way to keep us controlled and at bay?  Certainly makes a lot of us into constant shoppers and re-modelers, doesn't it?  Is it really all just about making our homes look nice and the economy going in housewares?  I don't think so.  If women were encouraged to concern themselves with more then just beauty, how much more beauty could we create in the world?  If we could be judged instead of on appearances, both of home and body, and instead be valued for our legit contributions.  If the love we indulge in was a little less narcissistic, a little less materialistic, could we not make new worlds instead of new rooms, where we sit unappreciated and unappropriated like a forgotten, unused sex-toy?     

To me, this is a lonely picture and a hopeless one.  I was shaken and slapped.  Should just be called 'IKEA Sex'.  Everything's white, sterile, this pussy doesn't ever bleed, it doesn't get wet.  It's not allowed to, it would ruin the room if it did.  This pussy doesn't talk, it doesn't run, it never leaves the room.  There's no seated family at this table, and the pussy as a chair means that technically...this room is empty.  Except you're in the room too, also looking but not there.  So that glass is forever unbreakable and empty, while lamps sit unlit on the floor, cords exposed, flanking her flanks so it's further impressed that she has truly transcended objectification by becoming an object.    

#2.)  'Black Girl'

I know it's jarring, truly I feel Mr. Hoppek means no disrespect, we have to remember that all women are a fetish ultimately just for being born female.  It is just as John Lennon sang, "Woman is nigger of the world, she is a slave to the slaves," that is the concept this artist is also trying to portray but in visual form, unfortunately a bit more acquiescently.  I've been to a fetish ball, full body coverings like this are used in certain extreme S&M play, and there's been a huge surge over the last decade to accept S&M behavior as normative.  But it's not, it's a fetish.  It's not sex-play that everyone engages in or even likes.  It doesn't create two equals in a relationship when practiced either, it instead creates a literal slave and master relationship.  It can create a fertile ground for an abusive domestic atmosphere to grow and prosper at the expensive of the sex 'slave'.  When the media creates what it creates and spews it out there for it to just get accepted instead of analyzed and discussed things like this:

(I actually love this movie...)

  

Promoting that somehow women allowing men to 'do what they want with their body' they're being sexually empowered?!--ha, ha, ha, wait, WHAT?!  No, this is not what the sexual revolution was about.  The only touted 'benefit' to the S&M subculture going mainstream is the dominatrix myth of a sexpot that emasculates males--however--that's a MALE FANTASY, any dominatrix I've ever met kinda were misandristic and needed money.  Granted, I have not met many a dominatrix, but I can tell you, the ones I did meet were not living out a personal fantasy.  They were getting paid.  

Same with the silly notion of high heel shoes.

Women, you are crippling yourselves slowly by wearing heels.  They are hellish contraptions designed to elongate the leg and accentuate the curve of the butt (why do you think strippers WEAR such ungodly high heels) so when men look at you, you contribute to THEIR fantasy, not yours.  What might be cute at 20, I guarantee by ages 32--42 if you wear shit like that on your feet all the time, you're going to have foot pain and it's not worth it.  It's not worth looking sexy to men, and what men, what kinda men do you think are watching you walk down the street in heels that disfigure you?--worthy men?  Men that are brave, handsome, sexy, employed, non-pervs?  Not all the men that see you looking that way are worthy of seeing you look that way and certainly aren't worthy enough for you to disfigure yourself slowly over.  I'm serious.  High heels, are the shoe fetish that belongs to the MALE and is projected ON the female.  It's time to put our foot down and say no.  Again, when a barrage of commercials show you all the "latest styles in footwear"--it's all bullshit trying to get you to buy into disposable commercialization.

Say no to the nonstop high heel.  Be weary of the S&M sex-play because it's certainly not all rainbow glitter kittens of love at its pith.

#3.)  'Rainbow Bondage'      

This makes me really sad, because it reminds me of this rainbow crayon I had as a kid that I totally loved to use to draw rainbows all day sometimes.  It reminds me of childhood, innocence, of that desire to be loved and to find a love, but that pureness is in chains, instead awaiting the feeling, the purpose, of being physically hurt by someone instead of receiving their love.  Tied up with love as the pretense without any love in the context.  A lover you don't have to love.

It looks like child abuse.  That's what I think about it.  It makes me uncomfortable yet, it truly is beautiful, especially the translucent rainbow superimposed over her face.  So I feel for the subject, and again, she's showcased in a white, sterile environment, and has to bury her true feelings and emotions inside of herself..in order to not ruin the carpet.  Many layers and meanings in this work.  It's overwhelming. 

 #4.)  'Rainbow Cover'    

It's truly amazing that with just this model's face and feet exposed do you still feel like you're somehow in violation of witnessing a moment of orgasm.  You see how she's a part of the earth and feels all the color, you see how she's sexy and how that can still be accomplished under an an afghan Grandma probably made her, you see how she's young, how she flows, how she doesn't need a man or a toy or her hands to achieve ecstasy.  This is the exact pictorial of why and how women are made into fetishes as well as nurturers to generations of men.  

#5.)  'Coffin-Mirror'   

A literal self-refection, this image is about how when women allow themselves to become victims of narcissism, they will actively contribute to the objectification and sexualization of themselves to the point where the big reward of being 'the fairest of them all' is sometimes just an early grave.  I know that's a bleak and blanket statement but if you think about all the Jane Does found ravaged in abandoned fields and the serial killer viewing fare on TV in the United States, when you consider the women and girls that are literally held captive and en-caged as sex slaves for years or decades, this photo, really should lead you to a similar conclusion.  The pink piping of the mirror while she dons red and black underwear, I think is just a comment on how anymore, in the corporate media machine, little girls are just primed in pink before getting shellacked in the more sexed up black and red.  The coffin lid says, "Motorcycle" and has a high relief of a cross cut out, and again, she's in a sterile room.  To dive in further into this image, we have to consider the coffin lid itself.    

What do motorcycles mean, what do they do?  They kill the wreck-less and vibrate people's junk.  They symbolize a rock'n'roll lifestyle of wild sex, hard drugs, and make me think she's naturally attracted to the token 'bad boy'.  They also symbolize freedom but in this instance, notsomuch.  The cross is mocking in this instance and I'm only inclined to say that based on another Hoppek photograph featured in this collection.

#6.)  'Crossed' 

  

Many layers here as well, women aren't allowed to be 'cross', we aren't allowed to ever be mad.  Especially in work environments in corporate America.  As soon as a woman displays conviction or passion in a disagreement, she gets pegged as 'emotional' or 'aggressive'.  Things even when males actually do display in work environments--aggression or acting out of emotion, especially when managing others--are glossed over and accepted.  Too many times have I seen women bypassed for positions that are handed over to less competent males, yet women are supposed to always be friendly, be helpful, be well behaved, submissive, docile, these are attributes that are still encouraged and instilled into women.  Not that all women should be wildcat, unfriendly, badass bitches--but too often it's forgotten that to be female is to be human first, not woman first.  And humans have a varied range of emotions and behavior that we should ALL be allowed to express.  Too many times the American female is pegged as passive-aggressive--is it because she's suppressing too much of her assertive aggression or is because she's not allowed to truly be aggressive in the first place?  It's so easy for a male to degrade an enraged woman by calling her a 'crazy bitch' or instruct her to 'calm down' when she's angry, which, if she's anything like me, will make her MORE angry.  

I don't want to hate on religion here or pick on any version of Christianity, but covering her with crosses was obviously no accident, the model is also looking downcast, almost ashamed of herself.  And I'm sorry but me personally, as I began to age and question more, I ended up having to step away from the Quaker roots I was ingrained with.  Certain tenants of the faith are lovely and should be practiced, perfected, and replicated.  But other tenants, I struggled with greatly.  Almost all of Genesis sets the foundation for patriarchy, capitalism, industrialization, wage slaves, the clothing industry, the demonetization and distrust of women, the tendency to NOT question authority, and set the stage for our current quagmire of gender engineering.  What's worse, is that the "rules" in Genesis were set up basically as guides to get us here, to the point of which we have arrived.  Where "dominion over the earth and sea" has lead to a GIANT ecological crises when we as a species stopped having a reverence for the earth and instead were encouraged to "dominate" it.  A god that denied us the ability to live eternally because we disobeyed Him to seek knowledge?  Why are these religious concepts accepted still?  And what does the tale of The Fall really tell us?--that Eve was curious and shared something she found with her husband to bring him up to her level just so he could throw her under the bus and blame her for his own actions later?--yeah, guess it's all just subject to interpretation.  Because put in that way, Adam becomes the first victim-blamer ever, it wasn't him that ate that apple of his own free will and accord, it was Eve's fault for giving it to him and telling him he should, not his own fault for listening and biting into it on his own.  Eve didn't twist his arm.  At this point, I would also like to say that I do not believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible either.  Literal interpretations are for small minds.

Also, why constantly be ashamed of your nudity and your body?  You are a perfect construct of nature and clothes?!--clothes are a tawdry escapade into The Fashion Industry that further promotes a separation from the divine depending how deeply one delves into becoming a fashionista.  Why would god's first gift to us be clothes?  Clothes are ultimately a deception.  And if life originated from Adam why do we all start female in the womb?  Why is female the default setting?  Something doesn't add up and you're always better off seeking enlightenment on your own, instead of having it spoon-fed to you.   

#7.)  'Wedding Dress Bend-Over'

Most women don't understand that marriage is slavery.  A lot of people also forget--or just fail to realize--that black men got the right to vote in the United States before women of ANY color got the right to vote.  In reality, outside of romcoms, too many financially disadvantaged women get lured into marriages for economic stability, something that society itself doesn't offer them.  Real love, much less romantic love, has very little to do with marriage and I think that's everyone's dirty little secret.  The jobs we land determine whose hand we hold far too often, and that has everything to do with a S&M mentality, and absolutely nothing to do with real love.  Don't get me wrong, I've met married people that truly do love each other and I personally plan to change my last name based on love.  But life changes situations, if your husband or wife developed cancer--would you stick around?  When they die will you not maybe eventually remarry?  If your partner was made retarded by a motorcycle accident, would you still be able to love and remain with your partner?  Those are real life situations that romcoms dance over.  People also neglect to acknowledge that it's possible to be in love with more than one person at the same time and there's no room for this in traditional marriage, especially for women who cannot take on multiple husbands.    

                         

#8.)  'Pink Bath Latex Pussy'

Beyond this just being a beautifully shot photograph, with the reflective pink surfaces vs the blue utilities, there's an evident grit and grime in this bathroom, a missing tile beneath the pink shower curtain, the separation between the tile in the shower stall, the bottom of the exposed foot even looks dirty.   Did she fall into the bathtub?--was she pushed?--placed haphazardly?  Is she in danger?  Is she aware she's being filmed and/or photographed?  The high heels echo the preoccupation with the Catholic School Girl fetish and the made up face at first reflects the face of the geisha and the preoccupation with the Asian School Girl fetish, but at the same time, it also recalls the made up face of Kabuki theater, then you can't help but notice the androgynous nature of this human body, this could very easily be a male in the bathtub with a latex pussy placed over his penis and pals.     

And that latex pussy man, what IS that?  That looks like a stylized version of what a child would draw of one.  It looks like an alien, but it is the goal of so many is it not?  The goal isn't getting the girl anymore, it's getting her pussy.  It's disturbing.  It reminds me of prostitution and porn (prostitution on film), it makes me think of rape, drug abuse, and failed dreams.  Again, we see Hoppek's juxtaposition with pink and red and black.  That crazy latex pussy also reminds one of those over-the-top queens, the men that sleep with other men, yet adopt the qualities of "female behavior"--the shoes, the makeup, the clothes, the speech, the sashay, this essential caricature of femininity, yet some display real disdain towards toward the actual women they are trying so hard to personify, so the latex pussy seems more like the idea of what a gay man would have of a vagina instead of what a vagina actually is.

#.9)  'Gyno Wheel Chair'

The latex pussy appears again here (as well as in other photographs) but the model looks dead here.  It makes me think about motherhood, life, death, childbirth, and female sexuality completely differently.  She looks like a butchered breeding cow in a slaughterhouse.  And makes me recall a recent article I read that mentioned how America doesn't have enough vulva clinics.    

So while it's probably easy for an American male to purchase a latex pussy, it's not so easy for an American female to get a doctor, even an ob/gyn, to properly diagnose vulva pain.  And that in of itself should show the sorry state of affairs both sexes in The State find themselves in.  

#.10)  'Pacifier'

Obviously a play-on for a sex doll, only rendered by an actual living woman, a real woman who is not merely purposed to only BE a sex doll.  What does portraying women like this pacify exactly?--a male's sexual urges or a female's freedom from objectification?  Do sex dolls prove that men will fuck anything with a hole?--is that what men want proven about them?  Isn't there supposed to be more dignity in humanity?  

#.11)  '2 Pacifier'

Tits not as substance providers but as pacifiers for the male gaze.  Pacifiers for the male in the sex act, for him to nurse upon, mimicking the bonding act of mother with child, in the effort for what?--to get a female to bond with him, to care for him as she would her own child?   

#.12)  'Little Girl'

This is about sexual child abuse and how the pink thread of all things female, being helpful, loving, trusting, kind, "sugar and spice and everything nice", can forever tie a female child to the susceptibility to sexual predators that actively prey on these weaknesses to exploit them.  It also touches on why your friend Joey constantly dates 19 year olds that look like they're 12 or prepubescent.   

#.13)  'Obama Beach Ball'

Probably a direct jab at America, we see how absolutely miserable the model's face is even though she's holding an apparent blackface minimalist version of our president on a beautiful beach under a perfect sky.  Even though Obama is basically a nice guy, we see a similar problem here as we did when voting rights were granted, we have had 44 consecutive male presidents.    

I hope she wins, it's about damned time.     

3 Mannequins You've Probably NEVER Seen Before - (Probably ***NSFW***)

In the immortal words of Franz Kafka on following The Policy of Truth, "Don't bend; don't water it down; don't try to make it logical; don't edit your own soul according to the fashion.  Rather, follow your most intense obsessions mercilessly."  

So I'm merely gonna take that advice from Kafka and be as honest here as possible in this post.

Remember waaay back in ol' 1987 when the word 'Mannequin' was a movie?  

(Oh look!--it's almost like a toe tag she's got on herself there but it's like a pink price tag ankle bracelet, how cute)!

And when the word "mannequin" was just for a giant plastic human figure to exhibit clothing on in a "realistic" fashion that was slightly less creepy than a Victorian Doll for the purpose of selling various attire?    

(You are welcome for the nightmares).

Well, now a mere mannequin means so much more.

"Mannequin ah, wah-unn..."

#1).  THEY NOW COME WITH PUBES! - For instance, an American Apparel New York City outlet recently revealed a lingerie display mannequin with a full-on bush, nipples, and areolas.  In a display window.  For any passerby to see.  To let this construction worker take a picture of it with his smartphone and this other guy ogle at something that is merely representational of the female form, symbolic of it, if you will. 

Really fucking creepy, right?!

"Mannequin ah, two-hooo..."

#2).  FINALLY, SOME SEX DOLLS YOU CAN SIT ON! - All the dummy fun hasn't stopped yet.  Russian socialite Dasha Zhukova posed on a chair made to look like a black woman engaged in submissive S&M activities - on fucking Martin Luther King, Jr. Day no less!  

Zhukova has since apologized, said the picture was "art" and somehow "taken out of context"...  ...All I know is some rich young white bitch sat down and seemingly was completely oblivious and callous to the fact that once upon a time, an old poor black woman had to sit down (most likely due to exhaustion) in the wrong section of a bus to incite social change and that this, art or not, out of context or not, is appalling.  I am incredulous someone made this mannequin into a S&M bondage chair.  Just as I am equally disbelieving that the inspiration piece for the above pictured chair is the below pictured chair.

John Lennon's song "Woman Is Nigger Of The World" has never been so aptly apparent or parallel.

 

  (Too bad he abused women sometimes himself).

I can't help but think of the sci-fi classic 'Soylent Green' and how women in the future literally came with the monthly rental of a high-end flat and were so coined as being "furniture" because of this.  But this isn't the future and not a sci-fi movie.  So why is it currently acceptable to show representations of the female form in sexually submissive and enslavement positions and have them be used as "furniture", especially by the wealthy?  Because we're not fucking furniture.  We're fucking human beings, so get your damned filthy ape hands off of my human form!!!

But as art, as a work of art what does a mannequin chair of this magnitude suggest?  What does the photograph of Zhukova's derriere crowning such a chair suggest?  It is proposing that despite race or sex, it is wealth that is the great divider as well as gender among us.  That a female typecast as sexually desirable, when coupled with being at a disadvantage--say impoverished--can be perched upon as a novelty item for the rich, as a sex slave for the perverse and it does not matter if she is black or white, it only matters that she is female and she is poor.  She is a worthless plaything, a toy, as Lennon lamented, "we paint her face and watch her dance."  She is ultimately, an amusement.  Entertainment.  Devoid of the intricacies of the human spirit.  

What's next in the line of home decor for the ultra wealthy?--Mexican Chair People?!

Who knows what 3D printing will bring us in future home design, with the way things are going, certainly not an end to homelessness.  This next image you've most likely seen before because it had gone viral.  Thus bringing us "home" to-- 

"--Mannequin tha-reee..."

#3).  FULL FIGURED - A Facebook post from Women's Rights News of a full figured mannequin in a Swedish clothing store went viral in early 2013 with the sentiment that the U.S. should invest in something similar so a more accurate portrayal of real woman could be used in retail display.

If anything, this image going viral proved that American women are deeply unsatisfied with the over-proliferation of inaccurate physical deceptions of themselves because they are living life in average female forms in a 'reality' where the lie of impossible beauty standards has achieved normalization and the truth leaves normal females feeling abnormally average with their own self-image, so they're displeased, they can communicate with each other and polarize better, given contemporary technologies.      

This chaise, for one, will not go quietly.  Nor lounge about.

Because seriously...

      

...how many blogs is it going to take?

"Ah, CRUNCH!"

   

Avicii vs Nicky Romero's "I Could Be The One" - (Music Video Review) ***SPOILERS ALERT***

This music video manages to be both riotous and poignant.  It weaves between banal adult reality and hyperactive hedonism to such an extent, that there's really no way of telling if the main subject's fantasies are only just that - mere fantasy or reliving a tropical abandon on a recently taken holiday.  A tropical abandon that through a myriad of miniature existential crises becomes quite clear is not an escapist life style for our subject but her actual preferred lifestyle choice.

The main subject is a rather "thick girl" who's portrayed as both conservative to the point of dour and as an eccentric sexy leopard lady:

Too, too many times, especially in music videos, a woman's appearance is limited to only being sexy or beautiful (or just naked).  So it's reeeaaalllllly super refreshing to see a female portrayed as multidimensional and not just by her choice in appropriately themed dress.  She's dissatisfied, bored with her so-called office "peers", reeeaalllllly horny, a sexual aggressor even when getting it doggy style (you know, that's how she wanted it), spontaneous, rebellious, funny, inconsiderate, acts on self empowerment to self actualize, she is after-all, a free spirit.  As her "To Do List" so aptly spells out for us:

Some could even say that her character is acting just as emboldened as a man.   

There is a direct reference to being quixotic when she's dancing in front of windmills and perhaps it is this very characteristic that brings her such misery in her droll workday life.  She's a dreamer and her listless job does not reward this attribute in her, but instead punishes her for it.  Her therapist gives her no real advice or insight, just increases the dosage on her anti-depressants when she confides that, she feels like she's "trapped in someone else's master plan".  (She is, and that plan is embedded in someone else's plan that was an outdated vision of someone else's master plan and so on and so forth with all the embedded layers until it's a clusterfuck we all partake in daily, wandering and wondering just as aimlessly as the lady in this music video).  

All of this enforced meaningless of course drives her to going a bit low-key postal at the office, in one of thee best, "I don't give a fuck" scenes of all time:

However it all ultimately just serves as a precautionary tale when after she finally storms out of the office, books a one way ticket to Barbados, and gets smashed literally one nanosecond later by a"2 Late - Rush Delivery" truck.  

No Aesop Fable, sure, but still a very raw lesson: sometimes by not risking living life to its fullest your punishment is to die slow, sometimes by risking living life to its fullest your punishment will be to die quickly, but either way, the outcome is the same.  None of us are getting out of here alive.  So it is truly up to our own individual free wills to choose--do we live as others may have us live and risk the life that could be or do we risk tossing what others would rather have us do in order to fully embrace life?

It's a tough choice sometimes, I know.  But I also know this is probably one of my more favorite music videos that I've seen in a very long time, so without further adieu, I present to you the music video for "I Could Be The One."

      

     

American Girl: Come On, Release An American Girl With A Disability - Here's 4 Doll Ideas!

YingYing Shang has done something truly marvelous for her disabled little sister Melissa Shang - she started a petition for American Girl to release a disabled Girl of the Year doll.

Melissa Shang's request is just as reasonable as it is honorable.  Afflicted with Charcot-Marie-Tooth, a form of muscular dystrophy, it's touching to know that through this deliberate action, she, herself, is actually setting an example of empowerment for many.  In particular, other little girls, disabled or otherwise.  

American Girl dolls are a viable alternative to the-rubbish-one-growth-spurt-away-from-a-landfill dolls that young women are somehow encouraged to play with lately these days, such as:

BRATZ Dolls 

Monster High Dolls

Barbie

  
With American Girls 'Historical Characters', I was actually really disappointed to see that apparently nobody appeared to give the green light on such wonderfully inspirational historical figures as: Laura Ingalls Wilder, Amelia Earhart, Eleanor Roosevelt, or Anne Frank.   

So if American Girls needs a little help on who they should design their hopefully future 'Enabled Historical Characters' dolls after per the Shang's sisters request and petition, and consider one of them for 'Girl of the Year' doll, here's four ideas of who could make excellent additions to that new line and surefire 'Girl of the Year' doll contenders:  

1). Frida Kahlo - is a Mexican artist that sustained back inquires as a teenager in a trolley accident from which she'd never recover, yet she went on to become one of the most well-known artists of the 20th century.  Kahlo also had misshapen leg from contracting polio as a child.  As an artist, she is most known for her self-portraits, many that portrayed her in her wheelchair.  She was a fierce and passionate artist and this drew the on-going attentions of other famed Mexican artist Diego Rivera--whom she no doubt served as a muse to.

(One of her paintings).

2). Helen Keller - the first blind and deaf person to earn a college degree, she also published 12 books, including her spiritual autobiography, My Religion.   Keller was a political activist, a member of the Socialist Party and campaigned heavily for women's and labor rights.  She was a lecturer and served on the Alabama state quarter.  The woman, Anne Sullivan, who was the impetus to this major change in Keller should also be celebrated!   

(Beautiful Helen Keller).

3). Marlee Matlin - a deaf actresses who won an Academy Award for her leading role in the film Children of a Lesser God (1986), still stands to be the ONLY deaf performer to win an Academy Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role to date.

(Earning that Academy Award).

4). Sudha Chandran - accomplished in India despite losing a leg to infection after a 1981 car accident, she still became a well-known Bharatanatyam dancer, using a prosthetic "Japir foot," which enabled her to become one of the most highly acclaimed dancers in the entire world.  

It's difficult for anyone who's got any type of disadvantage to get by in this world let alone for a disabled person to excel in it.  So let's honor ALL of these women by signing this petition, retelling their stories, by listening to their accounts of their life experiences, by being inspired - especially by the Shang's that remind us all, to petition with our sisters!

  

Toys 'R Us Kid - (extremely short poem)

I don't want to go to work,

I'm a Toys 'R Us kid,

there's a million other people

I'd rather be with,

There's books to be read, games to be played, stuff to be writ...

I don't want to go to work

because, boy, if I did...

...I wouldn't be a Toys 'R Us kid. 

Disney Princesses: Then Vs. Now; PLUS - Why Is Hot Topic Selling GIRLS Lingerie? It's Time To Move Beyond Anatomy

The ether is all abuzz over whether or not these Japanese "Disney Princess Lingerie" items are a Dream Or Nightmare.

Fairly modest lingerie visually, but intellectually, rather disconcerting. 

(Yes, "Belle" has been misspelled). 

Personally, I'm unwilling to answer: dream or nightmare?-- because that's a very childish way of asking, good or bad?  Instead I'd rather ask, how did this get made and to what purpose was it made?  Are these being marketed to little girls, pre-tweens, 'tweens, teenagers, young adults, fetishistic adults, furries, fangirls - to whom for purchase?  Was there such a large demand necessitating supply?  Frisky writer Winona Dimeo-Ediger gushes over the bras and even asks, ..."any guys reading: do you dig the sexy princess look?"  I say if the dude does, keep him away from your princess crazed daughters.  

There's no denying that there's some weird hypersexualization of Disney Princesses meets Bratz Dollz occurring.  All anybody has to do is look to see the transformation of physicality for so many princesses.  Or Google Images "Disney Princesses Classic/Original" vs Google Images "Disney Princesses 2013" to compare and contrast some of these changes.

The "original" Disney Princesses: 

vs.

The contemporary "Forever Fairy Tale" Disney Princesses:

Let's put the immediate focus on Snow White.  Here she is as originally portrayed in 1944:

And here is Snow White as her more recent 'forever fairy tale' incarnation: 

Here is a little girl wearing a contemporary Snow White costume:

I'm sure even the most unobservant eye can discern that over the course of 69 years or so, Snow White has undergone some radical albeit seemingly slight changes.  Her simple red bow placed in the center of her crown, is now a bedazzled headband placed cockily at an angle, to enhance a face that certainly alludes to innocence but not youth.  The Plasticine innocence seems feigned due to the bow placement.  Her heart-shaped neckline hearkens breasts that once upon a time, as a normal 14-year old, Snow White would still be in the process of developing.  (That's right, Snow White is supposed to be 14).  She's covered in sequins, sparkles, and designs that were not there before.  1944's shoes are gray with with bows and probably had a shorter heel.  But now she's more coordinated with her footwear.  The extra fabric of her dress spiraling over exposed ankles (most stills from the 1944 animation portray the character with her dress hem covering her feet entirely obscuring her shoes).  Tilted head, coy smile, interlocked fingers and hands, all paired with a loose--very unladylike--stance really make present-day Snow White look, well, sexually knowledgeable.  Which is the true insult behind the word "slutty-looking", it's a woman looking like she knows what sex is and that she knows that she likes sex.   I know these are just cartoons I'm mincing over, at least until you look at the real-life little girl, emulating her cartoon princess fantasy, and it's seen that it's not the character that child is so enchanted by but the ability to be a breathtaking princess.  There's no care for woodland critters in this dress-up kit.  It's all about superficiality, she's flirting--quite literally--with shallowness.  The only red bows adorn her high-heel shoes and scepter, she has a crown on--the key to this play fantasy being fulfilled--and her tiny torso is embellished even further with piping that pantomimes the hourglass figure of a fully developed woman.  With a royal crest being used FIVE TIMES to further the perception of being a princess, as if the crown and scepter were not sufficient enough.                  

Seriously?!--it's over the top!  Especially for a child's toy.  Especially for child's play.

And why princesses?  Why is it SO important to little girls to be something so untenable and unattainable as a princess?!  It's one thing to imagine being a princess, it's quite another to profess that indeed, you are one.    

(All hail Princess Bitchface)!

It's like Disney is profiting off of setting-up novice parents for failure on how to "properly" rear an adolescent girl.  Little girls want to be princesses because of marketing, and marketing child's play is corporate governed gender engineering, and ultimately becomes SOCIAL engineering.  Not mere child's play so much, if you think about it like that.     

(Excuse me while I get my royal shop on y'all).  

Shouldn't our daughters want to be chemists, engineers, doctors, writers, computer programmers, just as much, if not more so, then wanting to be "Disney princesses" or shopaholic sluts?  

At first it was fairly jarring to see the "Bell" bra and pantie set until I realized that Hot Topic has a girls lingerie section, not underwear, lingerie.  (And for some reason 'tutus' are considered a subcategory of lingerie).  So this isn't your run-of-the-mill mom's Victoria's Secret lingerie (which, honestly, should be the only type of lingerie being sold) but lingerie being donned by most likely your 'tween or wannabe 'tween.  Every woman knows that the difference between underwear and lingerie is, unseen and seen.     

So who the hell is supposed to be seeing this on a GIRL:

 

(Guess the matching bra and panties would really make the outfit).

I'm not a prude by any means, but the notion this crap is getting purposely marketed to hipster kids as 'lingerie' is sickening.  How are they supposed to "celebrate" a sexuality that they don't even comprehended completely yet?  How are they supposed to realize that SEX is a minor blip on the radar of life as a whole, and that hormones, disease, aging, and maturing perceptions are going to distinctly impact how they relate to themselves and others not just as sexual beings but as conscious self-aware beings?  That's just it, they don't.  So why is lingerie like the following being showcased and made available to impressionable youth? 

(The jailer stripes must be a visual play on the concept of 'jail-bait' and notice the wordplay of "BANG" and "come" centered on this model of unknown age's ass).

Party-on lovesick indecisive jail-bait that confuses sex with love, and let your ass speak for you in the bedroom.  Seriously though, how old are these models showcasing this tawdry filth and does underwear really even need to be displayed on anything other than a mannequin ever?

I remember my first racy pair of underwear were a stolen pair of red thongs that had a crushed red velvet front, with a little red bow at its top, and a sheer red lace back.  My high-school boyfriend was overjoyed that Valentine's Day, especially when at the age of 16 or 17, I had the perfect heart shaped ass.  But I was no virgin by that particular Valentine's Day and when I did loose my virginity, I was donning an Alfred E. Newman t-shirt, not a stupid red velvet lacy thong.  

      

Kids are going to grow-up and fuck each other, sure.  And they probably won't even be wearing underwear when they are fucking, I know.  BUT that doesn't mean grown ass adults need to be all sketchy on their ethos and literally market LINGERIE to GIRLS.  It's Perverted Capitalism.  It's disgusting to see some corporation that gets afforded most of its brand loyalty due to the perceived notions of having pro-family values, make shit like these Disney Princess Hipster Panties sold at JCPenney:       

(That's just one "M" away from 'mmm').

What else is bothersome is the literal gender inequality delivered via Hot Topic's underwear categories.  The blatant hypocrisy.  Boys get to be GUYS, whereas girls stay GIRLS, even when they get to dress like smutty GALS.  GUYS get to wear underwear, even push gender boundaries by allowing their hidden bronie to show:   

But that's just it, there's no lingerie for males being marketed.  There's certainly no lingerie for 'tween or teenage boys being marketed with Aladdin rubbing the "magic lamp" on the front of a boy's lacy G-string.  There's not an equality in the hypersexualization of the adolescent American male vs. the adolescent American female.  On Hot Topic's website it's just one page of 12 items, all boxers, all under the ONE category of UNDERWEAR for Hot Topic's banal guys.  Unlike the FIVE subcategories girls get to deal with under LINGERIE:

- Blackheart Lingerie

- Bras/Bandeaus

- Panties

- Bustiers

- Tutus

It's like the notion of young females being able to wear plain old underwear is somehow old fashioned, instead of just practical.  

I know there's an extension of childhood occurring in America right now, but in the end, every parent has to ultimately grow-up to ensure that their child doesn't get a replica of their own childhood or a similar childhood even, or forbid a worse life experience, but instead a different childhood, unique to them, a hopefully better childhood then what their parent's experienced.  That type of foundation doesn't have a tag on it and isn't sold in retail stores.  But our children need a better childhood, both sexes, so our species can advance together, not stagnate together, with a pink plastic rhinestone tiara on top of our budding fashionista's collective head just so some shareholder can pick up another eight-ball of coke Friday night.  Where's the advanced humanity in that, Disney?!     

(Anyone else out there identifying with this graffiti stencil right now?) 

MC Lars was right, indeed, Hot Topic is NOT punk rock:

We as human beings need to recognize that anatomy is not our singular destiny.  Human beings have far more anatomical similarities then differences.  There's got to be a commonality to ensure the common good.  Our "souls" are all sexless and colorless and classless.  We have to hope that during this Communications Revolution that we find ourselves in, there will be an accompanying period of enlightenment, that with the power of social media, we'll actually witness an end to gender altogether.  Both issues that Johanna Blakley and Alice Dreger outline in the following TED Talks:

Johanna Blakley: Social Media and the End of Gender.

Alice Dreger: Is Anatomy Destiny?

Because in Japan, matching couple's underwear isn't actually a big deal, ironically enough.  

So ladies, don't dare don that "Bell" pantie set unless he's in one to match!