Comments on: The veil or the push-up bra? It’s a false (non)choice http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/ Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:53:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Mark http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294937 Mark Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:14:49 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294937 Oh dear, ShelleyK, I really can't remember. I was looking at some studies on the incidence and distribution of eating disorders for a course I was teaching last year but it's completely gone from my mind now! Oh dear, ShelleyK, I really can’t remember. I was looking at some studies on the incidence and distribution of eating disorders for a course I was teaching last year but it’s completely gone from my mind now!

]]> By: ShelleyK http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294936 ShelleyK Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:22:20 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294936 I just happened across this thread many months after the discussion so this is probably a post into the ether but c'mon are we still talking about 'choice' as this utterly decontextualised thing we possess/exercise through our individual free will? And let's not forget, going back to what we're talking about here - children as empowered, smart, competent, self-aware and choosy consumers - (I guess I have myself and my own kids to provide a reality check against this assumption - on a daily basis..) The problem is the discussion about children and their consumer patterns (I guess) continually and quickly morphs into generalities about size 16 women choosing to wear tight pants (hurray!) - so that women and girls are collapsed immediately into the same category, with the same competencies and capacities. (This almost never happens when we talk the problems that boys face as consumers, learners or whatever). A bit insulting for women but even more worrying in the imposition of womanhood onto girls of any age (because there are massive differences not only in capacities amongst girls but huge gaps between a 6-year-old and a 12-year-old girl). It would be useful if we could particularise who we are talking about when we talk about these beings with so much control and choice. ( Mostly we are talking about a fairly normative and privileged child-suject.) By the way, Mark, what exactly do you mean when you say there is something "interesting about body confidence and eating disorders" (is it the relationship between low self-esteem and eating disorders that you're referring to)? If not, ;et me know and I will apply for that lurking ARC grant, pronto! I just happened across this thread many months after the discussion so this is probably a post into the ether but c’mon are we still talking about ‘choice’ as this utterly decontextualised thing we possess/exercise through our individual free will? And let’s not forget, going back to what we’re talking about here – children as empowered, smart, competent, self-aware and choosy consumers – (I guess I have myself and my own kids to provide a reality check against this assumption – on a daily basis..) The problem is the discussion about children and their consumer patterns (I guess) continually and quickly morphs into generalities about size 16 women choosing to wear tight pants (hurray!) – so that women and girls are collapsed immediately into the same category, with the same competencies and capacities. (This almost never happens when we talk the problems that boys face as consumers, learners or whatever). A bit insulting for women but even more worrying in the imposition of womanhood onto girls of any age (because there are massive differences not only in capacities amongst girls but huge gaps between a 6-year-old and a 12-year-old girl). It would be useful if we could particularise who we are talking about when we talk about these beings with so much control and choice. ( Mostly we are talking about a fairly normative and privileged child-suject.)

By the way, Mark, what exactly do you mean when you say there is something “interesting about body confidence and eating disorders” (is it the relationship between low self-esteem and eating disorders that you’re referring to)? If not, ;et me know and I will apply for that lurking ARC grant, pronto!

]]> By: Jackie http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294935 Jackie Wed, 06 Dec 2006 19:30:16 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294935 I think this choice rhetoric is so frustrating..It's a woman's choice to wear a push up bra, it's a woman's choice to wear the veil, but in reality, our choices are severely restricted as women and we can't fail to acknowledge the context in which these choices are made and the influences behind them. Are women wearing push up bras in certain parts of Africa? Of course not, because breasts are not hyper-sexualized as they are in our society! Why are women wearing the veil? In some cases..it's for spiritual reasons...in some instances it's for protection from rape and harassment and again, there's this underlying idea, as in america, that women's bodies are "the sex". Check out a radio show I did with Sheila Jeffreys on Beauty and Misogyny. It's pretty much my point of view stated much more eloquently. go to www.ffiles.net and click on the download tab..then click on the Beauty and Misogyny picture and you're ready to go! I think this choice rhetoric is so frustrating..It’s a woman’s choice to wear a push up bra, it’s a woman’s choice to wear the veil, but in reality, our choices are severely restricted as women and we can’t fail to acknowledge the context in which these choices are made and the influences behind them. Are women wearing push up bras in certain parts of Africa? Of course not, because breasts are not hyper-sexualized as they are in our society! Why are women wearing the veil? In some cases..it’s for spiritual reasons…in some instances it’s for protection from rape and harassment and again, there’s this underlying idea, as in america, that women’s bodies are “the sex”. Check out a radio show I did with Sheila Jeffreys on Beauty and Misogyny. It’s pretty much my point of view stated much more eloquently. go to http://www.ffiles.net and click on the download tab..then click on the Beauty and Misogyny picture and you’re ready to go!

]]> By: tigtog http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294934 tigtog Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:34:55 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294934 I'm kinda following it Mark, but it is overly jargon dense. Let's see if I've got it glen: if choices are artificially constrained, either through actual physical barriers or emotional barriers along group-identifier lines, then what consumers/citizens are offered is really a "non-choice". This relates back to Susoz's comment that she'd rather ensure women have <em>control</em> over their own bodies rather than just an array of "choices". (eg whether it's called manure or organic fertiliser, it's still all actually crap) I’m kinda following it Mark, but it is overly jargon dense.

Let’s see if I’ve got it glen: if choices are artificially constrained, either through actual physical barriers or emotional barriers along group-identifier lines, then what consumers/citizens are offered is really a “non-choice”.

This relates back to Susoz’s comment that she’d rather ensure women have control over their own bodies rather than just an array of “choices”. (eg whether it’s called manure or organic fertiliser, it’s still all actually crap)

]]> By: Mark http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294933 Mark Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:56:17 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294933 glen, I'm still at a loss as to what you mean by "choice" and "non-choice". glen, I’m still at a loss as to what you mean by “choice” and “non-choice”.

]]> By: sublime cowgirl http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294932 sublime cowgirl Wed, 18 Oct 2006 05:19:17 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294932 <blockquote>I’ve observed, what in my eyes, is a positive trend in young women’s fashion over the last year or so. That is, that young women who are size 10 or 12 or 14 or 16 or 18 are quite happy to wear the ultra tight jeans, figure hugging tops and breast highlighting bras that are the current look. And they look fabulous. I like to think that many people are being taught by their confidence and curviness that feminine beauty comes in more than stick thin model form. And I like to think, sociologically, that these women are far less likely to fall prey to eating disorders. </blockquote> Skirting fashion for a sec, the problem with the illustration is that according to health and obesity demographics, the plethora of young women in size 16 and 18 may actually be exemplifying eating disorders. Apart from this health related issue, of course large girls should feel comfortable to wear hawt clothes ( i always think the goth look works for big gals but then of course i would..). OR to not wear clothes. (Australians do tend to follow the English in their prudishness in regards to nudity, rather than the less hung up Europeans). :)

I’ve observed, what in my eyes, is a positive trend in young women’s fashion over the last year or so. That is, that young women who are size 10 or 12 or 14 or 16 or 18 are quite happy to wear the ultra tight jeans, figure hugging tops and breast highlighting bras that are the current look. And they look fabulous. I like to think that many people are being taught by their confidence and curviness that feminine beauty comes in more than stick thin model form. And I like to think, sociologically, that these women are far less likely to fall prey to eating disorders.

Skirting fashion for a sec, the problem with the illustration is that according to health and obesity demographics, the plethora of young women in size 16 and 18 may actually be exemplifying eating disorders.

Apart from this health related issue, of course large girls should feel comfortable to wear hawt clothes ( i always think the goth look works for big gals but then of course i would..).

OR to not wear clothes. (Australians do tend to follow the English in their prudishness in regards to nudity, rather than the less hung up Europeans). :)

]]> By: glen http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294931 glen Wed, 18 Oct 2006 04:47:16 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294931 oh and thanks Laura!!! you are such a superstar that someone should make a dance called the 'Laura Dance' that is so wicked that heaps of peeps make their own versions of it and post them to youtube tagged with "Laura's dance" yes, become the buzz! BECOME THE TAG! oh and thanks Laura!!! you are such a superstar that someone should make a dance called the ‘Laura Dance’ that is so wicked that heaps of peeps make their own versions of it and post them to youtube tagged with “Laura’s dance” yes, become the buzz! BECOME THE TAG!

]]> By: glen http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294930 glen Wed, 18 Oct 2006 04:43:24 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294930 me: "fabricating ‘consumer choice’ in capitalist societies" kim: "your argument about choice being impossible under capitalism" kim, unless you are referencing something else I may have written in a fit of drunken sugared-up neomarxist rage, which is very possible with some of my comments on LP, then we are talking at cross-purposes. :) I did it with my third years today, where we talked about the spectacle and populations of consumers as markets. From the Crary (orig. ital.): <blockquote>Spectacle is not primarily concerned with a <em>looking at</em> images but rather the construction of conditions that individuate, immobilize, and separate subjects, even within a world in which mobility and circulation are ubiquitous. Spectacle is not an optics or power but an architecture.</blockquote> The 'collective individuation of populations' is what I bang on about continually on my blog and elsewhere (here, in comments). I treat the 'spectacle' as a way of engaging with a biopolitics of the image. What is at stake is the production of certain populations (markets). It gets really tricky when the transversal dimension of the spectacle is taken into account. Here is a simple (and actually oversimplified) example: There is a single market for Falcons/Commodores, if you do not want a Falcon or a Commodore you therefore belong to a different market. The 'choice' between a Falcon or a Commodore is a non-choice because you have already been individuated into a certain population (of Falcadore owners). There is no single media text (advertising) that will do this, rather the event of your individuation is transversally distributed across a number of media. Massumi calls this a becoming-together. My innovation is the transversality of the media event (derived from Guattari). This is going to become ever more important with the accelerating proliferation of 'screens' (ala Virilio) or 'interfaces' and associated cross-platform media events. Another example is the way John Howard has led the collective individuation of a certain population of nationalist, 'middle-class' and mostly conservative voters. The problem for Beazley is that for Labor to win power he either needs to harness the enthusiasm of this population for his own devices and produce a consumerist non-choice or individuate another population along different axes, which is very difficult, and offer a real choice. Non-choice and choice terminology derived from Boorstin's notion of event and non-event. me: “fabricating ‘consumer choice’ in capitalist societies”

kim: “your argument about choice being impossible under capitalism”

kim, unless you are referencing something else I may have written in a fit of drunken sugared-up neomarxist rage, which is very possible with some of my comments on LP, then we are talking at cross-purposes. :)

I did it with my third years today, where we talked about the spectacle and populations of consumers as markets. From the Crary (orig. ital.):

Spectacle is not primarily concerned with a looking at images but rather the construction of conditions that individuate, immobilize, and separate subjects, even within a world in which mobility and circulation are ubiquitous. Spectacle is not an optics or power but an architecture.

The ‘collective individuation of populations’ is what I bang on about continually on my blog and elsewhere (here, in comments). I treat the ‘spectacle’ as a way of engaging with a biopolitics of the image. What is at stake is the production of certain populations (markets). It gets really tricky when the transversal dimension of the spectacle is taken into account. Here is a simple (and actually oversimplified) example: There is a single market for Falcons/Commodores, if you do not want a Falcon or a Commodore you therefore belong to a different market. The ‘choice’ between a Falcon or a Commodore is a non-choice because you have already been individuated into a certain population (of Falcadore owners).

There is no single media text (advertising) that will do this, rather the event of your individuation is transversally distributed across a number of media. Massumi calls this a becoming-together. My innovation is the transversality of the media event (derived from Guattari). This is going to become ever more important with the accelerating proliferation of ‘screens’ (ala Virilio) or ‘interfaces’ and associated cross-platform media events.

Another example is the way John Howard has led the collective individuation of a certain population of nationalist, ‘middle-class’ and mostly conservative voters. The problem for Beazley is that for Labor to win power he either needs to harness the enthusiasm of this population for his own devices and produce a consumerist non-choice or individuate another population along different axes, which is very difficult, and offer a real choice.

Non-choice and choice terminology derived from Boorstin’s notion of event and non-event.

]]> By: Alex http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294929 Alex Wed, 18 Oct 2006 04:13:39 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294929 Fashion has been in a steady decline following the phasing out of 'choose life' tee shirts. Fashion has been in a steady decline following the phasing out of ‘choose life’ tee shirts.

]]> By: j_p_z http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294928 j_p_z Wed, 18 Oct 2006 04:08:16 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/17/the-veil-or-the-push-up-bra-its-a-false-nonchoice/#comment-294928 Laura: "...As well as orange and lime (hideous, artificial, fluoro orange and lime, not nice subtle citrus colours) there was an equally nasty aqua, and it was all matched with tacky white denim jackets and vests." Lime jeans and white denim vests? Great globular clusters! Who's in charge of dressing you people -- Cecil Beaton?! Actually, that'd be kind of a fun idea. OK, everybody in Melbourne get in line, and let's try it again from the top: and a-one, a-two, a-1-2-3-4... THE-NIGHT-THEY IN-VENT-ED CHAM-PAGNE... Laura: “…As well as orange and lime (hideous, artificial, fluoro orange and lime, not nice subtle citrus colours) there was an equally nasty aqua, and it was all matched with tacky white denim jackets and vests.”

Lime jeans and white denim vests? Great globular clusters! Who’s in charge of dressing you people — Cecil Beaton?!

Actually, that’d be kind of a fun idea. OK, everybody in Melbourne get in line, and let’s try it again from the top: and a-one, a-two, a-1-2-3-4…

THE-NIGHT-THEY
IN-VENT-ED
CHAM-PAGNE…

]]>