VOICES

Sex Sells, and so Does Slut-Shaming

A brief history of the media’s demonization of women

JOSEPHINE ROSS Staff Writer

Women have been demonized, blamed, and vilified in just about every sphere of life. Patriarchal rules have dictated our way of life for thousands of years, from defining which clothes are acceptable to wear, to the extent of our bodily autonomy, to how dating should work. In a patriarchal society, any power or recognition that women may obtain is curated and dictated by men. The most visible, public, and influential example of the patriarchy in action is the media. Early newspapers served as a public platform to gossip about, defame and slander women of high society in the late 19th century. During The Golden Age of Hollywood, newspapers sexualized and demonized Hollywood stars. In the advent of tabloid culture, the media slandered women, from politicians to child stars in the “meltdown era”, a period where misrepresenting these young women as crazy and erratic was a common occurrence. Today, with more reach than ever before, online news outlets continue to hyperfixate on women in the public eye. American model Emily Ratajkowski in My Body writes: “the women who gained their power from beauty were indebted to the men whose desire granted them that power in the first place. Those men were the ones in control, not the women the world fawned over…[a woman’s power is limited] when she survives and even succeeds in the world as a thing to be looked at”.

Marilyn Monroe is an early victim of the entertainment industry, being marketed as a sexual commodity and not as the serious actress she aspired to be. Monroe was forced to weaponize her beauty and sexuality to avoid being denied the serious roles she desired, which resulted in her being typecast as a ditzy blonde. This invoked unjust comparisons between Monroe and her peers in the industry, such as Audrey Hepburn. This led to Monroe further pushing for a chance at a role that would allow her to show her true range. After many years, she eventually succeeded in convincing 20th Century studios that she could go beyond being the sexy supporting actress. Despite this, the media jumped at any opportunity to villainize, libel and slut-shame Monroe as she attained a new level of fame, an example of which being when nude photographs she had taken at the beginning of her career resurfaced. Nonetheless, while filming The Seven Year Itch, the iconic picture of Monroe, her standing over a subway grate with her silky white dress being blown up by a gust of wind, was widely used for publicity. Monroe’s beauty and sexuality pushed her to the top of the Hollywood elite and propelled her acting career, but was also the cause of the endless slut-shaming backlash she received from the media. Monroe was ultimately at the mercy of male-influenced media, which dictated whether her sexuality was to be leveraged or shunned in the public eye.

Another young woman affected by the media’s framing of women was former White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. Her name grew to become synonymous with infidelity and sexual deviance. Lewinsky was portrayed as a slut and a homewrecker by various tabloids. Meanwhile, Bill Clinton, who was twenty-seven years older than Lewinsky at the time, in addition to being her superior, faced relatively less critique. This double-standard is rooted in misogyny; Lewinsky’s image was destroyed, and she struggled to find a new job due to the infamy clouding her name, while Clinton continued to have a successful career. Lewinsky’s sexual history could be used against her because her image was at the mercy of the media, while Clinton’s, at least from a sexual perspective, was not to the same degree.

Britney Spears is one of many celebrities of the 2000s who fell victim to the child-star-to-tabloid-cover pipeline. Following the release of “…Baby One More Time” in 1998, when Spears

Photo VIA PINTEREST, AMAZON, BUZZFEED was only sixteen, she received critique from parents, media outlets and even politicians for her “sexual and provocative” clothing, lyrics, and attitude. The press asked her about her sex life from the very beginning of her career, her virginity (or lack thereof) being a hot topic of speculation. In the aftermath of her breakup with fellow popstar Justin Timberlake, Spears was depicted as a heartbreaker, a cheater, and a ruthless bitch, while the public sympathized with Timberlake. New York Times critic Wesley Morris describes the situation as Britney being “the school slut” and Timberlake “the school quarterback”. The public continued to side with Timberlake after the release of his music video for “Cry Me A River”, in which the singer runs after a Britney lookalike. The vicious, but all too common, double-standard was inflicted upon Spears after the split with Timberlake. While only twenty-two, her breakup was publicized and she was slandered, Timberlake escaping unscathed. This is a far from exhaustive telling of the various women who have been victims of the media’s unjust treatment over the years. In a male-gaze-dominated culture, women are most marketable if they are portrayed as sexy or beautiful. With the rise of tabloid culture, this sexualisation can be milked further by becoming the topic of gossip. In essence, many female celebrities have been built up to be beaten down for the sake of sales and views. The long history of women being victims of the media is far from over. I am desperately hoping that the media today will be kinder towards young women like Charli D’Amelio, Olivia Rodrigo and Millie Bobby Brown, but early hints point to a repeat of the same cycle. p p

Admit Me, Admit Me Not

A Rant on How Dawson Students Have Been Dealing with University Applications

CASEY KISS Voices Editor

With university applications looming as I write this, I can’t bring myself to act like everything is fine and write a professional, soft-spoken piece. I’m ripping out my hair, and I’m well aware I’m not the only one feeling overwhelmed and overworked by applications and awaiting answers. Graduating Dawson students seem to be stressed as turkeys in October. There’s only one word that properly describes the process of getting into an institution of higher education; ridicustrating.

Ridicustrating is a word I just made up, combining ridiculous and frustrating. I feel it perfectly captures the way people are feeling about that March 1st deadline, application fees, and waiting for that “Congratulations!” email. I also feel that I’ve already abused my last remaining brain cell by writing countless letters of intent and creating portfolios to market myself like a show pony. Candidly, ridicustrating is also birthed of a lack of enough energy to use spell check, my bad.

I’ve obnoxiously brought up my complaints about the university application process with just about anybody who would listen, and I’m always met says Colia Bach, another fellow graduating Dawson student, with a subtle reference to Riverdale.

Receiving an admission acceptance only comes after the stress of building your application and then stewing in anxiety waiting for said answer. To top things off, the acceptance will cost you around the same amount it cost to apply in the first place. Obviously, all these CEGEP students are just itching to get rid of the wads of cash lining their pockets, right?

All of this comes despite some Universities being desperate for new admissions. A totally very anonymous managing editor explained to me, “I kid you not, Bishop’s even invited me to a production of Godspell”. The email read, “Congratulations once again on being admitted to Bishop’s” which was followed by the invitation– and allow me to put emphasis on the “once again”.

This isn’t an isolated experience though; A number of students I spoke to are getting spammed with emails reminding them to “Hey! Please come to our school!”. So, explain to me how this makes any sense; In an ever-changing political landscape, institutions of higher education are struggling, yet they ask students to jump through flaming hoops to get in.

Despite the hassle of figuring out your plans for higher education (or not, both are valid decisions), I have immense faith in all you dear readers, as you were smart enough to pick up an issue of The Plant to begin with (wise decision).

While I do pity those (myself included) currently facing the Goliath that is university applications, to those not yet facing these trials and tribulations but are planning on doing so: Good luck! You’ll do great, fingers crossed for minimal tears and multiple admissions.

No matter how ridicustrating I find the admissions process to be, don’t show this article, written out of pure spite, to Concordia admissions. I still want to get in. I love University, it’s so great. Please accept my application. p p

with eager agreement. But why is the process so stressful? Well, each program has its own list of requirements, from R score levels, to mounds of additional documents, not to mention having to complete this extensive todo list for each individual school. “The McGill application process is whack,” says Elizabeth Woo in reference to her struggle to make sense of this important undertaking.

The clarity and guidance offered while applying is non-existent. “Concordia asked me to send my portfolio 3 times… SoRrY? Should I take screenshots of every page and put it in a word document? SIR?” offered Florian Breault about his experience with the chaotic warzone that is admissions sites. “I’d rather commit manslaughter than go through the highs and lows of university applications ever again”

In an ever-changing political landscape, institutions of higher education are struggling, yet they ask students to jump through flaming hoops to get in.

Ask The Plant

ISABELLA BLU PTITO-ECHEVERRIA

Copy Editor

Dear Plant,

Why do feminists bitch and moan so much about “the patriarchy”? I’ve seen girls get free drinks for being girls, get into bars for free. I can hit another guy but WHOOPS can’t hit a girl! Women have privileges that men don’t. Isn’t that sexism?

-PoonSlayer

Dear PoonSlayer,

When you think of a feminist, I gather you’re imagining some pestilential B.O-ridden fat lady with shittily dyed hair and a burning desire to call out bigotry whenever possible. “It’s the PATRIARCHY’S FAULT,” the caricature yells. “WE LIVE IN A WORLD SATURATED IN MISOGYNY AND BIGOTRY!” These words have been driven so deep into the ground that they’ve lost all meaning. Just empty buzzwords, right?

I admit that this was my view of feminism for a long time; why should women complain about things? In the 21st century, women can vote, go to school, and, as of March 2021, according to a Forbes.com article written by employment lawyer Tom Spiggle, “when accounting for other factors besides gender, such as in education, experience, location, and industry, the gender wage gap shrinks dramatically to just a 2% difference. So the controlled gender pay gap [as of March 2021] means that women are making 98 cents for every dollar men make”. With legislative equality, a practically non-existent wage gap, and the female-exclusive ‘privileges’ you mentioned, what the hell is the problem?

Let me define “patriarchy”, because that word gets thrown around with such reckless abandon that it’s a rotting rag-doll corpse of a word in this day and age. A patriarchy is a society that is hierarchical, a patriarch being at the top. To me, a patriarch is not simply ‘a man’. A patriarch is a role that a man is expected to fill. A patriarch is a man with the duty of leading a family or tribe, and as any leader often is, patriarchs are expected to be stoic, strong, and dominant. Being forced into such a role is obviously not easy. This is why patriarchal society isn’t just a matter of men being at fault for everything; The expectations imposed upon people by patriarchy hurt both men and women.

Most societies on Earth are patriarchal. Even though patriarchy in the West is much less of an outright legislative issue, the patriarchal culture rooted in our history bleeds into every facet of our lives. Funnily enough, the ‘privileges’ women get (like free drinks, free bar entry, and immunity from being backhanded by a man even if she hits him first), are a product of patriarchy. If men are cast as the leaders, women are cast as the followers. If men are the conquerors, women are the conquered. If men are the heroes, women are the damsels in distress. As a result, women are defaulted into their roles to complement the roles expected of men.

In a patriarchal world, bars often expect male clients to be seeking female conquests. As a result, it makes sense for bars or parties to let women in for free. More women means more men will want to come to the event. Simple business strategy.

Why do women get free drinks? Because buying a girl a drink is an easy way to start a conversation, try to flirt, and try to fuck. If a woman is getting that free drink because she’s a woman, we can assume that free drink is an attempt at ‘conquest’. And yeah, a drink is a drink. That is a perk. The expectation of a woman being frail and defenseless is also a perk in the “can’t hit a girl back” situation you mentioned. That expectation is also shitty at times when a girl just wants to play sports or be taken seriously.

Every role has its pros and cons. Being a leader, conqueror, and hero has its perks. So does being a follower and a damsel. The issue comes when roles are assigned to us and STUCK to us on the basis of something as arbitrary as gender. True equality is abolishing any ‘special treatment’ or idea about a person on the basis of their gender. Any person who says that ‘all men act like this’ or that ‘all women should be treated like this’, is not a true feminist.

Thankfully, the rigidity of patriarchy gets more diluted with every generation. Less and less men are binding themselves to patriarchal roles, which, in turn, frees women from them.

So, PoonSlayer, you are right to be upset about women getting special privileges. However, it would be skin-deep to blame women alone for the problem. Know who the real culprit is? Patriarchy.

If you’ve got a problem with the treatment women get simply because they are women, I’ve got bad news for you, bud. You’re a feminist.

Wishing you free drinks and poon,

The Plant.