Posts tagged as:

menfolk

A couple of months ago, we bore witness to a vintage Spanx for men ad and had a good old laugh about it. But don’t be surprised when I tell you that the modern-day equivalent has now arrived. Introducing the Core Precision undershirt, a body-shaping undergarment designed for men. The “man-girdle,” as it has been colloquially referred to, will sell for about $90 to $98 and is designed to create a sleek and slender male form, taking inches off the waistline. Now, if men want to jump on board the body-slimming-garment bandwagon, who am I to stop them? But, really, why the hell would they want to? This is where some handy marketing comes into play.

Strangely (and yet not surprisingly), while the Core Precision undershirt and Spanx (the designed-for-women kind) were created for similar purposes (i.e., to squeeze the body into a smaller size and different shape than it actually is), the two products are marketed quite differently. The male version promises to “improve posture, support core muscles, visibly streamline and slim, control body temperature, and promote circulation.” This description appeals to one’s sense of logic and the desire to improve one’s form in a good-for-your-body kind of way. Improves posture and promotes circulation? Sign me up! On the other hand, women’s Spanx claims to “shape problem areas, accentuate your waistline, minimize your tummy and thighs, lift your rear, and make inches seem to disappear.” The focus here is on aesthetics, implying that women are actually concerned only with appearance and can’t be bothered to contemplate more practical matters such as core muscles.

Of course, women have a long history of wearing undergarments that slim down (and sometimes harm) the body. (Corsets, anyone?) And the fact that these types of products continue to sell well (I’m assuming the Spanx people make a pretty penny), means that the marketing they use must work. However, when a similar shape-adjusting product is created for men, it needs to be advertised as actually improving one’s physical form and health. (And people say sexism is dead. Ha!)

Good for the body or not, the one thing that the Core Precision undershirt and Spanx do have in common is their ability to cause discomfort. However, as a male journalist for the Times Online describes after his one-day test of the Core Precision undershirt, although the garment is rather restrictive, it does still render the wearer capable of breathing. And I’m sure many women who have squeezed themselves into corsets, Spanx, control-top pantyhose, and other body-smooshing undergarments have used the ability to breathe as a basic criterion for wearability.

Hell, if manufacturers of body shapers are looking for an advertising hook, why not go with this one: “Allows you to slim down while still retaining the ability to take shallow breaths.” But I guess this is why I never went into advertising.

{ 4 comments }

421px-jockstrap_ad_1941_01

{ 0 comments }

missed connection: 1 by erdemtasdelenThere is something about the “Missed Connections” segment of Craigslist that I find irresistible reading. I used to read them and wonder if I’d ever find one composed to me. I never did, but that didn’t stop me from being sucked by their emotional range, from the horny to the sweet to totally creepy. A sampling:

Hilarious Horndog:

OMG, you were the smokin’ hot cute petite brunette, and you & I exchanged ’nuff smiles. Your cute little tight butt looked great in those tight black pants! If you see this, please write back! ;-)

The gay (i.e. direct) approach:

We both got off at ****** subway and ended up on the 49 ***** bus…im spanishasian m was listening to Ipod. I dont think i made it to obvious but i was staring at your crotch when you werent looking. Can i have whats inside?

Sweet:

you study on level nine, you are very cute, you listen to your ipod and never have a laptop only your books. we make eye contact sometimes, like today outside when you were going in, but i don’t know whether you like guys and/or whether this is all in my over-worked head. probably.

Possibly a nice guy:

You are the stunning red head with a nose piercing in front of me while standing in line at Starbucks in ***** on Wednesday around 4 pm. You glanced at me, but I was not sure if you were there with anyone else. Wanted to tell you that you have beautiful hair. Would love to buy you a coffee and find out more about yourself.

Was a nice guy ’till the last line:

You were there at the *****, dancing all the way to the left of the speakers by yourself for a bit wearing a tank top, roomie pants, and a hat that you tucked your long hair into. I thought you were interesting, and even before i saw the long hair I guess you could say I had a bit of a crush. I was dancing right in front of the wall of speakers lol, i’m sure you didn’t even notice me. I had to leave because my friend had work the next day, and I happened to see you at the bar, letting your hair down, I kept telling my friends “she had long hair, I can’t believe all of that was tucked under her hat…” Anyway, it’s late, maybe we could go out for tea and tings if you aren’t some crazy, psycho, binge-coke head.

Borderline creepy/possibly just shy:

we are working together at *****. i’ve noticed you since day 1 but apparently we don’t talk at all but we manage to exchange glances. hope to know you more.. coffee/tea maybe?

Kinda weird:

hi i am looking for a nice girl for fun time, watching movie, etc etc. i am shy and looking for same type of girl.

Flat-out creepy:

I see you almost every morning, around 07:20, you’re very cute with brown curly hair, full lips, red nails, and you get off in ****** west to take the south bound subway. Yesterday, April 21, you appeared with totally straight hair which looked beautiful, and today you went back to your jumpy cute curls… Are you interested to know who I am ? I think you do…

The winner:

you have hair, I have eyes…. email me

The loser (doomed by generic descriptors):

I’ve seen you a few times and each time I’ve stopped what I’m doing and let time stand still. I’m not sure what your nationality is but your beauty is to that of an elegant porcelain doll. Each time I’ve seen you it has been in ***** Library on the main floor. I need to say hi before the school year is over, not sure I can wait the summer months to pass to maybe see you again. You have fair skin, brown hair that was tied back, wearing jeans and a sweater. You were sitting in the middle seat, in between two other people.

{ 0 comments }

Gleet ain’t neat

by Anastasia on April 24, 2009 · 0 comments

in Health

Lads!  Be careful this weekend!

Because gleet ain’t neat!

{ 0 comments }

Attention hetero ladies–contrary to what country crooner Mickey Gilley may have led you to believe back in 1976,  you do not, in fact, “look prettier at closing time” (or apparently at any other point in the day) to a drunken potential date, though you may find him hotter if you’ve imbibed. 

A new study published in the British Journal of Psychology announces this curious discovery. Researchers showed (presumably heterosexual) women and men–in various states of inebriation–pictures of members of the opposite sex and asked them to rate their attractiveness.  According to a summary in the Daily Mail:

While the women rated the faces in the pictures as more attractive after drinking, alcohol had no effect on the men’s judgement.

On the surface, the study may seem rather shallow, but, in fact, its findings have some important legal implications: 

Drinking did not affect either sex’s ability to judge age, leading to the researchers saying that the influence of alcohol should not be a mitigating factor in the case of a man accused of under-age sex.

Not surprisingly, since their publication, the results have spawned a spate of news stories, like this one and this one. Interestingly–and disappointingly–among the crop are a number that downplay or  completely ignore  the portion of the study’s outcome related to the women’s perceptions of men or how men’s ability to judge age accurately despite drunkenness might affect the legal outcome of sex with minors cases. Instead, in many quarters is much guffawing over the fact that men apparently no longer can use the so-called “beer goggles” excuse when their buddies tease them about the women they take home. Sigh.

{ 0 comments }

Easter 08 by NBPageA lot of people love Easter because Easter means chocolate, ham and deeply satisfying existential angst.

I love Easter, though, because Easter means getting to listen to David Sedaris’ incredibly funny “Jesus Shaves” story. You can read it, but it’s even better to listen to him reading it. It’s less than 10 minutes and worth every moment–technically it might be NSFW if your co-workers frown upon your mirthful laughter. As Sedaris explains, if you can stop chortling for long enough, France has a totally different way of observing its springtime/ fertility ritual (which is nowhere near as interesting as the springtime fertility ritual that takes place in Japan.)

But it’s also nowhere near as, um, interesting as the Easter ritual I got to personally experience in a small town in the Czech Republic a few years back (which I wrote about in an anthology called Turbo Chicks: Talking Young Feminisms ). Like in Japan, this fertility ritual is also pretty phallo-centric: the boys and men fashion whips out of branches that they braid together (see the photo of the young boy with his soon-to-be-sauced father).

They then go around in the morning, knocking on doors of their women friends (and in some cases acosting women in the street). They use the whips to spank the girls and women while chanting a little rhyme (which is something to the effect of “give me your hen’s eggs so you’ll have fertility all year”). The women are supposed to put on a show of shrieking and running around. Afterwards, the men are offered a shot of alcohol and the boys get chocolate. The women also tie a ribbon on the end of the whip (I’m sure I don’t need to spell out the conquest symbolism here), and then the menfolk are of to the next home.

One question I have about these fertility rituals was how they became–or were they always?–so focussed on the penis, when it is, after all, the womb and vagina that does the real work of fertility. Then again, when you think about how dissociated chocolate eggs and Peeps have become from the actual process of birth, maybe it’s not that unusual at all. What are your thoughts about Easter? Do you know of any other interesting cultural traditions that help mark the change of season?

{ 4 comments }

women_playing_musicToday, Vancouver plays hostess to the Juno Awards, celebrating Canadian music. Congrats to Divine Brown, Kathleen Edwards, Alannis, Deborah Cox, Sarah Slean, KD Lang, and the other gals up for prizes. Good stuff!

Women still remain among the minority when it comes to Juno nominations. Though  they do own three categories entirely (”Vocal Jazz Album of the Year,” “New Artist of the Year,” and “R&B/Soul Recording of the Year“), few women (either on their own or as members of groups) get a nod elsewhere–consider their sparse presence for “Songwriter of the Year,”  ”Contemporary Jazz Album of the Year,” “Contemporary Christian/Gospel Album of the Year,” and “New Group of the Year.” Several of the top categories, like “Album of the Year,” “Rock Album of the Year,” “Rap Recording of the Year,” and “Group of the Year” have no women representin.’ What’s up with that?

It may have been Courtney Love who, in an early nineties interview, lamented girls’ preference for dating boys in bands over picking up an instrument and starting their own. A 2008 British study suggests the gendering of musical instruments may be at least partly to blame for their absence on stage:  for this reason, mid-nineties female bass player blip aside, drums and guitars remain squarely in male territory. Harp, piccolo, flute, and vocals, currently and historically, represent the more feminine routes to musical participation, according to this study. And whatever they do play, for women, professionalization can be tough; the music industry boys’ club continues to work to bar the door with varying types of “no girls allowed” signs.

The intention of this is not to rag on the Junos–frankly, in a country where the arts are so embattled it’s nice to see a televised presence like this. Kudos to the organizers and broadcasters for highlighting  the varied talent Canada has produced. In the broader context of the Canadian music scene, however, one still has to wonder–what has to happen to generate more national exposure, fame, opportunities, and, frankly, money for women making music?

{ 3 comments }

Grape NutsI suppose it’s inevitable that if Metamucil is pitching itself towards women that Grape Nuts would start actively courting men. It was only a matter of time for the cereal to go viral, with two-minute videos with voiceovers saying, “When you tackle something tough at work or at home, that doesn’t just take know-how — that takes Grape Nuts.”Okay, my inner 14-year-old boy is totally giggling (”they said ‘nuts’”!) but my inner feminist is, like, totally rolling her eyes.

{ 0 comments }

2009_03This cover of the March/April issue of Psychology Today is one of the tackiest I’ve seen in a long time. Check it out: headless woman in a miniskirt, brandishing a toilet brush, towering above a shlubby-looking guy drinking milk straight out of the jug. “You’re Driving Me Crazy!” reads the headline, the implication being that an irritated Suzy Sexpot here took a break from scrubbing the toilet (which I always do in a skirt n’ heels combo, BTW) to nag her hapless hubby. But don’t forget, Suzy: if hubby doesn’t grasp the basics of household etiquette, maybe you’re the problem!

Okay, I understand and (in some instances) agree with the whole idea that, as the cover states, sometimes the solution to a problem lies with the irritatee, not the irritator. But I’m miffed that the article seems to be subtly directing its advice to the female half of hetero relationships. The piece provides a litany of irritants that are stereotypically associated with men: the aforementioned dirty socks on the floor, chewing loudly, leaving the toilet seat up, putting feet on the furniture, and so forth. But these objectively gross habits become, in this article, women’s problem:

If your partner has a habit that he or she is not aware of but that drives you up a wall—keeping the bathroom door open, leaving bread crumbs in the butter dish, walking around in underwear—bring it up in a loving way. Maybe it simply never occurred to your partner that it bothers you.

Nice job on the “he or she” there, but the exhortation to “bring it up in a loving way” sounds to me like another way that women are expected to take on the burden of relationship management. This kind of advice doesn’t really sound a hell of a lot different from advice that would have been published in the Good Wife’s Guide from the 1950s (you know what I’m talking about: “Don’t complain if he’s late home for dinner or even if he stays out all night. Count this as minor compared to what he might have gone through that day.”). Compare:

If your partner can’t seem to change sloppy ways, reframe the issue in your own mind. Instead of focusing on how inadequately he cleans, remind yourself how much you appreciate his contribution to household chores.

I just think this is such a good example of the ways that sexism sells men short. It’s like the message to men is: you’re stupid! You’re lazy! Women can’t expect any better from you!

But there’s also something really sinister about this article in its failure to really look at the gender dynamic of so-called “irritating” behaviour. What about when “irritating” becomes, oh, say, abusive?

Instead of seeing your partner as controlling, ask yourself what’s motivating them. A partner who doesn’t want you to go out with your friends may be scared of being abandoned. A partner who is second-guessing your decisions may be worried about you.

Um, yeah. Tell Rihanna that.

Also in the creepy/dangerous department is a “case study” (about as real as the “case studies” in Cosmo) about two young lawyers who wanted a baby, but fought all the time (read: the wife nagged the husband and the husband responded by physically pushing her, ’cause men who use physical violence on their partners have been provoked, right?). The couple decided in family therapy that their relationship was too violent to bring a baby into it. But then their therapist said to the husband:

“In the future, whenever she begins to go after you and wants to discuss money—whether at home, at a party, on the street—put your hand under her blouse or her skirt and fondle her.”

WHHAAAA…??? Um…WHHAAAA…??? Uh, call me a spoilsport, but if my husband responded to my need to discuss an issue as important as money by going in for a grope, he would not be getting lucky that night at all. And, um, this is a violent relationship we’re talking about, here! Aw, but what about the happy ending?

Not only did the tactic successfully interrupt the pattern of angry confrontation, it transformed it into a playful and warm dynamic. Within a month, she was pregnant.

YIKES YIKES YIKES YIKES YIKES YIKES YIKES. What happened to good, old-fashioned advice like, “If you’re husband is pushing you around, leave him”?!

Honestly, Psychology Today, why not just write an article that says, “Come on, ladies. You know men! Sometimes they just do stupid shit. They can’t be expected to do any better. So if you’re irritated, turn the scrutiny back on yourself. We know you do it so well!”

{ 2 comments }

IMG_1836.JPG

{ 0 comments }