I give her credit for coining "flossy".
Never read the Bobbsey Twins, eh Armsmasher?
Jeez, that's gross. They can't even bear to look at her.
(And where I come from the 9 o'clock threshold refers to 9 o'clock in the *evening*.)
I'm not going to watch the video, but did she do this part of her act?
Okay, most of the audience look to be pre-teen girls, and it wasn't like this was a video from a school concert, but something actually aired on TV, so I call shenanigans on the idea that the concert was for grade schoolers.
so I call shenanigans on the idea that the concert was for grade schoolers.
It's Good Morning America or some shit. It's not that the concert was staged for the kids, but that it's 8:45 in the morning, and @30 she's writhing around in front of these kids who are there to wave hi to their aunties.
I definitely see some little kids in the audience, though. In addition to the pre-teen girls. What the hell?
Seeing Fergie conduct herself that way, I can't say I blame Prince Andrew for wanting to end their marriage.
Okay, 10 just made me laugh out loud.
What about the cartwheels? What could be more wholesome than cartwheels?
Commenter needs food badly.
Sorry, wrong game.
You have no chance to survive make your time.
Listen Mac!! Dodge his punch then counter-punch!
but that it's 8:45 in the morning
Surely 9am for Fergie is like 2am to us?
Snake? Snake?! Snaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake!
Thank you Mario! But our princess is in another castle!
You can see nothing, feel nothing, taste nothing, smell nothing, and hear nothing.
Thank you, ! Another adventurer has already returned one of the four ingredients needed for the cure!
Fucking html tags ruining my joke.
Thank you, [UNRECOGNIZED TOKEN]! Another adventurer has already returned one of the four ingredients needed for the cure!
Grade schoolers, pre-teens, whatever. I vote for "embarrassing."
Don't standard internet conventions require you to say where you found this video?
That said, I will tell you all that the first Blackeyed Peas album was PK's favorite as a baby, and that playing it always helped him conk off to sleep. You think I'm joking, but many a babysitter was amazed. So I'll always have kind of a soft spot for Fergie.
So I'll always have kind of a soft spot for Fergie
You don't have to if you don't want to! The first Black Eyed Peas album doesn't have Fergie on it.
The Dixie Chicks were my little nieces' favorite musicians around the time when they slammed Bush. My brother had come to hate them after about 50-100 repeats, but then came the Bush controversy and as a Bush-hater he had to like them.
I always liked Fergie better than that slut Di. (Di Non-Kotimy). Di, Theresa, Mobutu: bad luck comes in threes.
So I'll always have kind of a soft spot for Fergie.
One of yer lovely lady lumps, I suppose.
||
Looks like another banner day for Hillary Clinton. She seems to be headed for a 65-35 win in Kentucky. Thing is, in the two higher delegate districts, it'll be tied, looks like (4-4 in the 3d, 3-3 in the 6th) and in the other four districts, they'll split 3-2. That's 19 for Clinton to 15 for Obama among the district delegates; and the at-large delegates would go, what 10-7. A total of 29-22, making 65-35 look a lot like 57-43.
And what do you know: Oregon has one more delegate overall than Kentucky, and the Oregon 3d district alone gets 9 delegates. That's mostly Portland east of the river, and Obama might win enough to go 6-3.
I predict that the day ends in a near wash -- maybe Obama up by 2.
|>
I'd show my daughters that video as a lesson in how they should not grow up to act, but I'm afraid that they'd be too impressed by the one-handed cartwheels, and I haven't taught them the word 'vulgar' yet.
you poor sheltered people.
You see more ass shaking from the cheerleaders at the 9 and 10 year old youth football games. Often, they will even smack their own asses.
Fergie's writhing is nothing.
Fergie's writhing is nothing.
Yeah I don't get the shock and outrage. It's hilarious, but hey, odds are the kids'll think "well she's dancing all stupid."
||
And...the Bulls win the draft lottery!
Hooray!
|>
You see more ass shaking from the cheerleaders at the 9 and 10 year old youth football games.
Like I said. (Comment 83; I'm not sure why the link doesn't put it at the top of the page.)
(Comment 83; I'm not sure why the link doesn't put it at the top of the page.)
Because it's already at the bottom of the page.
It's hilarious, but hey, odds are the kids'll think "well she's dancing all stupid."
I'm pretty sure that's wrong. A "tween"-aged girl would certainly recognize that there's some serious sexual signaling going on here, even if she didn't understand the specifics. Perhaps a younger child would, too. Kids start to pick up on this stuff at a fairly early age.
47, absent a reasonably complete understanding of how relative linking works, is funny.
47: Oh yeah. Duh.
Eh, so what, says I.
May you be blessed with daughters, Tweety.
51: look, insofar as it's teaches kids that girls have to act this way for people to like them, it's crappy. But then it would be crappy whatever age they were. As far as the relative danger of exposing kids to the reality of human sexuality, I think they can probably process it pretty well.
It's teaches are pernicious and should be banished.
Wow, weird. There must be some conservation of fuck-ups-with-apostrophes going on, such that I make them even when they aren't appropriate.
These are the teaches of Peaches.
Even though the whole sentence is fucked up, writing "it's", knowing that it would be in possessive pronominal context, made me uncomfortable.
It's teaches of negative feeling.
As far as the relative danger of exposing kids to the reality of human sexuality, I think they can probably process it pretty well.
The "reality of human sexuality" = the cheesy commodification of same? Increasingly, I suspect, our answer to this question must be in the affirmative. But I don't have to like it, dammit. And not every objection whatsoever to any form of sex-based expression whatsoever is the same as shocked and outraged prudery, you know?
58: look at my cock! LOOOOOOOOK!
No, I get you. Implicit accusation of prudishness: withdrawn!
As far as the relative danger of exposing kids to the reality of human sexuality
I'm fine with kids learning about the reality of human sexuality. I wouldn't say that Fergie's act is especially representative of the reality of human sexuality.
Anyway, my objection is mostly with the "teaches kids that girls have to act this way for people to like them." This shit saturates our culture, and it turns out to be not so easy to keep it away from my daughters.
Pwned. By a foreigner, no less.
Double withdrawn!
Still, I believe kids are canny enough to get that she's making a fool of herself. I do believe this.
Then, as Jesus points out, I don't have kids.
Tweety, withdrawal does not give you adequate protection.
Implicit accusation of prudishness: all over your face!
Well now you people are just grossing me out.
Double withdrawn!
The rhythm method of commenting!
I regularly mock a local police officer who had the misfortune of arresting a 19 yr old for getting a blow job from his 16 yr old gf. "Why are we discouraging this behavior?!?!?!?"
There are some benefits in having a 16 yr old daughter who is not influenced by the fergilishousness of society.
Is she singing a Heart song? That's just sick!
Actually, my guess is that Fergilizer keeps your lawn shorn.
More and more, I think Tweety is what's wrong with America.
Wow. Don't give up, Tweety, don't give up!
WHIP e'm OUT WEDNESDAYS!
gosh you Yanks don't half take it all a bit seriously.
I have also yet to meet anyone who both a) complained about the "commodification of sexuality" and b) could explain to me what they meant and why it was a bad thing.
You don't have to if you don't want to! The first Black Eyed Peas album doesn't have Fergie on it.
Hurrah!
Re. commodification, the "reality of sexuality", and daughters, as the mother of a son, the prevalence of this stuff is just as fucking annoying, thankyouvermuch. Not least because I *don't* want him to learn disdain for women who play the sexiful game.
But what does "commodification" even mean, and why is it bad? Actually selling sex as a service, yes I understand what that is and we can have a sensible conversation about whether it's on balance good or bad. Unrealistic portrayals of womens' bodies in the newspapers - again, I understand what this is, personally I think it's massively overstated but I understand what it means.
But "commodification of sexuality"? As far as I can tell it's taken third or fourth hand from Marx, and from one of the bits of Marx where I personally thought he was bluffing quite hard first time round. Why's it "particularly annoying"? They are a shit band and always have been, but the sexy woman singer is one of the *least* annoying things about the Black Eyed Fucking Peas.
Apparently, at least one guy thinks that Brittany Spears shows us why birth control is bad:
And as long as atheists describe the commodification of sexuality as an irreducible component of atheism,
There's a nice construction: it seems to be made of straw, and it's shaped...almost like a man!.
"Commodification of sexuality", from "commode", an antique expression still used in parts of the US and meaning a toilet. It's saying that trying to pick people up in airport bathrooms is a bad thing.
Granted that pussy and the like are commodities like any other, as we know, is that a proof of the non-existence of God, or a consequence? As an atheist I need to know these things so that I can argue with the JW and Mormon missionaries when they come to the door.
--Wait! I'm thinking foundationally again.
Shit. This stuff is too hard for me. Someone ask PZ.
God hasn't yet stated his position wrt commodifying sex. But he's totally on side with PZ.
Maybe I've been desensitized by our culture of secular filth, but I didn't find that clip particularly raunchy, or even overtly sexual (any more than rock 'n' roll is inherently sexual).
Is she singing a Heart song? That's just sick!
MCMC, you and I will disappear from this earth, and our bones will turn to dust, and our works will be forgotten, but the Wilson sisters will endure forever (OK, maybe not their 1980s power ballad releases).
When, after the apocalypse, the last classic rock station--its transmitter cobbled together out of transistors salvaged from the wreckage of anti-tank missiles, its broadcast powered by a hand-cranked generator--finally goes off the air, the last sounds it transmits will be the wailing vocals and punctuating guitar lick at the conclusion of Heart's Magic Man.
Commodification is selling something on the market with the advertising claim that it's something other than a marketed product. E.G. selling knicknacks and Tshirts which have an environmentalist or religious or patriotic theme but actually don't have any real relationship to environmentalism, religion, or patriotism. Or you could say, the market organization of an activity which pretends to be organized on non-market grounds.
Economists have ways of showing that a.) everything is all market all the time, and b.) if it isn't, it should be. So the family is just an inefficient, defective set of market exchanges which economics will improve.
In the same sense, to church people everything is Godly or Satanic, to Freudians everything is sexual, to comedians everything is a joke, and to megalomaniacs everything is theirs.
91: I don't see how you could sell a t-shirt with a religious theme that didn't have any real relationship to religion. If it's got a religious theme, then it's got a real relationship to religion!
Also, explain how this works for the example given.
So the family is just an inefficient, defective set of market exchanges which economics will improve.
Well, God seems to agree there:
"And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead." (Matthew 8:21-22)Libertarian Jebus sez: warehouse the old codgers.
90: How embarrassing would it be if someone where to comment on this blog if they had paid money to see Heart in person? Just askin' for a friend.
Emerson's got it. The video in the post, it's a performance of sexual desirability and availability, for money, which bears no necessary connection to sexual feelings in the performer. Just like some "green" tchotke might simply be a consumption item with no actual beneficial environmental effects.
A problem with this kind of commodification when it comes to sexuality is what it does to amateurs, your Jane Doe who wishes to express her sexuality for her own gratification (communicating with potential sex partners, actually having sex, and so on). To the extent the commodified performance model of sexuality becomes a social norm (as in, women are socially pressured to present themselves as sexually available and desirable in ways unconnected to their personal sexual desires and wishes), it makes it harder to express or communicate a non-commodified sexuality.
Eh. The above is mostly bullshit -- I don't have the vocabulary or theoretical backround to say what I mean clearly. But what Emerson said was going in the right direction.
I think Emerson elides a distinction between commodification (a Marxian term) and "fictitious commodities", a post-Marxian term employed by Karl Polanyi.
Anything that is not traditionally the subject of competitive market exchange, but becomes so, is commodified. Polanyi's insight was that certain goods (he cites land, labor, and money) have an embedded social function that is disrupted by making them subject to unconstrained market forces. I think Emerson is making a similar (and facially reasonable) claim for sexuality.
as in, women are socially pressured to present themselves as sexually available and desirable in ways unconnected to their personal sexual desires and wishes), it makes it harder to express or communicate a non-commodified sexuality
At exactly what point in history were women not "pressured to present themselves as sexually available and desirable in ways unconnected to their personal desires and wishes"?
I'm not accusing you of historical utopianism, but wondering where the discontinuity from history is supposed to be. Because mass media make it profitable to trade on sexuality? I think traditional societies did a pretty good job of this without modern communication technologies. The difference, if any, would seem to be the homogenization of sexual desirability and a more unrestrained "arms race" of titillation.
Heart is one of those bands, like Bob Seger, that make me change a radio station as fast as my fat little fingers will allow.
Granted that pussy and the like are commodities like any other
In late trading Tuesday, pussy futures fell below $100 per pound for the first time. In response, cock futures rose sharply.
I actually prefer Polanyi's terminology. I don't really think that the term is tied either to Marx's or to Polanyi's original statement any more; it has developed various meanings in use.
I don't see how you could sell a t-shirt with a religious theme that didn't have any real relationship to religion. If it's got a religious theme, then it's got a real relationship to religion!
Oh, I don't know. Frankly, I tend to think most "religious" products sold for a profit lack a "real" relationship to religion. The fish symbols on the back of the cars, if you ask me, have a lot more to do with personal branding ("Look at me! I'm a Christian!") than with serving some meaningful religious purpose. The sermon tapes and books and t-shirt and all that stuff sold at the back of the big obsequious mega-churches is arguably as much about the performance of religion as Fergie's bit was about the performance of sexuality.
But then, I have a real soft spot for that scene where Jesus gets pissed off in the Temple and knocks all the merchants tables around. (And I'm perhaps even more sensitive to the pressures to perform religion than the pressures to perform sexuality... )
(Or, just substitute religion for sexuality in 95, and pretend I said it.)
"Facially reasonable". You watch too much porn, KR, and that metaphor is not only gross but, to me, unintelligible. As it the counterpart of "anally irrational" or something?
pussy futures fell below $100 per pound for the first time
Mikesch's net worth has suffered terribly.
In late trading Tuesday, pussy futures fell below $100 per pound for the first time. In response, cock futures rose sharply.
Briefly, there was a price discrepancy between pussy futures, ass put options, and pussy/ass swap options, creating a lucrative arbitrage opportunity for alert traders.
Since then, market prices for light sweet pussy have recovered to normal levels, and refined pussy closed even higher, signaling an increase in the so-called crack spread. [rimshot]
Imagine that I'm an atheist in the Tshirt biz. I make Mother Theresa Tshirts with an inspirational message and spend the proceeds on coke and whores. And I make Che Tshirts. And MLK Tshirts. And Gandhi Tshirts. And Glenn Beck Tshirts. And Hitler Tshirts. And Save the Earth Tshirts. And Fry a Spotted Owl Tshirts. And all the proceeds go to drugs and poontang.
The significance of wearing a message TShirt is slight to none, and the enterprise making the shirts is completely disconnected from the issues and causes. I would call that commodification with no real connection to the causes. It's sort of the entropic end state of politics, where an issue has already been pervasive enough that it has become an easy fashion statement.
I know realize 105 would have been incrementally funnier if I had said "light sweet ass" and "refined ass". Everyone just imagine I did that.
98: that make me change a radio station as fast as my fat little fingers will allow.
Steve Miller does that to me. My theory is that if I hear more than 3 seconds at the start of "The Joker", it will precipitate the heat death of the universe.
For starters am I the only one disappointed that it was not Sarah Ferguson? Granted she is a little older but I've always had a weakness for redheads. And she has still got "it."
As for this "Fergie," if her raunchy act is well known then I blame the parents who brought their tykes to see the act. I suppose I blame Fergie too for not seeing the audience and toning things down (or classing things up). As for the kids who saw this on TV on the Today show I blame there parents less and the Today show more. Even if the Today show gave a warning I can see how some parents would miss it.
So I suppose I'm in the middle on this. Raunch is OK if there is ample warning for parents to keep their kid's away and if the performer makes a reasonable effort to keep it from the kiddies.
109:
Shoot. I should clarify that I would NOT like to see Sarah Ferguson performing that "act." It would diminish her sex-appeal completely.
I'm sorry if I gave that impression.
Personally "raunch" never really tripped my trigger. For me there is a line between sexy and raunchy.
98, 108: What seems to make this reaction is that these people had careers. So the Little River Band's one hit isn't heard so often and doesn't seem so sinister, doesn't remind us that people liked this stuff. And the strange convergence of timing, all peaking in the mid-to-late seventies.
For me there is a line between sexy and raunchy.
Sexy = protruding nipples
Raunchy = camel toe
Sexy = Strip tease
Raunchy = wet tee-shirt contest
Sexy = footsie under the table
Raunchy = foot in your crotch under the table
Sexy = skirt, no panties
Raunchy = low-waisted jeans, visible thong
So the Little River Band's one hit isn't heard so often and doesn't seem so sinister
Little River Band actually had a fair number of hits, a fact that I will concede does not speak well for the taste of the 1970s American radio-listening public. However, I would also vote to exclude them from the classic rock canon on grounds of egregious suckitude.
KR,
I guess we draw the line at slightly different places, but mostly I wanted to say that for your first item I prefer the term "puppy dog noses," which as far as I know was invented in my Frat, believe it or not.