'I cried when I saw my first Pussycat Doll costume'

[WillieWaggledagger]

Interview with Nicole Scherzinger in Marie Claire (i know, a bastion of feminist ideals etc)

The bit that made me so sad and angry was in the last paragraph:

'"I cried when I saw my first Pussycat Doll costume. It was my first photo shoot, and I wasn't used to wearing clothes like that," Scherzinger says of her skimpy outfits. Remind her of the catsuit she was sewn into for a performance last year on British X Factor, though, and the former theater nerd laughs at how far she's come. "Crazy, isn't it? My friends from high school were like, 'Oh, my gosh, our sweet little Nicole!'" she says. "It's growing up, though, right? I'm a woman, and it's part of owning what you are."'

I recall her saying something similar a while back.

She is talking BULLSHIT!! Its a publicity stunt.

She is quite happy to sing trampy songs in her own name. She is a just another cheap little tramp cavorting and warbling flith imo! Yawn! Next year it will be someone else singing about their their fanjo and being licked or whatever all over!!

My kids call her Shirtswinger!! Always makes me chuckle!

No, nor would I assume that she wasn't capable, but that's what makes me sad. In the grand world scheme of things think how much brainpower is wasted on this stuff and what it could achieve if all that attention was focused somewhere else.

Cocktail, I've never met the woman so couldn't possibly comment on whether she is a "cheap little tramp," although I personally would never be inclined to describe another person in that way. Perhaps in her case, the comment IS a publicity stunt. For me though, the story brings up the much wider issue of conformity to an ideal of appearance for women in the entertainment industry, and well beyond that.

Really Cocktail??? You just called a woman (who I presume you don't even know) a "cheap little tramp" on the feminist board? Wtf????

Tbh honest I don't care if you do know her. That is incredibly sexist and offensive.

We waste a lot of brainpower on fripperies though Quod.

People spend a silly amount of time and energy following football teams, polishing their car, growing vegetables they'd have been as well to buy at Waitrose... the list is endless.

Well yes. I chose to ignore the "cheap little tramp" comments.

Oops never realised this was the feminist board! Not that it makes up for my comments.

I just get sick of seeing women being portrayed like this - well more to do with the sexual exposure - whether you want it or not.

This is not the right board for it - but i will try to explain: I get so het up (not because I am a prude) about the fact I dont like listening to my DC singing along to highly sexualised songs. Having the radio on in the car is a hazard these days! I am sorry but I cringe when I hear my young daughters singing along to her songs and most of Rhiannas about being licked if the boy is enough etc etc.

I hate the way my kids can easily access on the TV at 2pm in the afternoon male and female pop videos that are so highly sexually suggestive - and quite frankly beyond suggestive.

I really dont want to start a fight here. I apologise for my slack use of words and putting across of my opinion which is more to do on another subject than the pop artist in question here.

Sorry!

Well I agree entirely with your second post. But I don't think blaming the female artists is the way to go. They are working within a set framework - designed and maintained by the male powers.

Cocktail, your last post is spot on. When celebrities collude with the female objectification "rules," it is certainly not noble, but I think I understand why they do it. If they look all around them, it's pretty clear that this is what a woman must do to stand the best chance of success regardless of their level of talent. I don't think just blaming them for making what is pretty well a Hobson's Choice is the best way to go though.

We see it time and again how female actors, musicians, etc. achieve "success" through highly sexualised styling, but when they start to get older, or are deemed too fat or too thin, too tarted up or too dowdy, they become fair game to be pilloried by the tabloids and gossip mags. You don't get the same thing with men, or at least not to the same degree. Their careers tend to have more longevity and they are less often and less harshly criticised for changes in their appearance.

But an awful lot of the gossip mags and some tabloids (R Wade until recently !) are managed by women and employ many more. They must think that they are catering to the female audience ? I don't know for sure but I don't think many men buy 'women's magazines' or do they ?

BTW what sensible person takes any notice of anything Gok Wan has to say ?

I think you are right and perhaps we are wise not to assume that someone in a senior position, whether in entertainment, journalism or other industries, will automatically be any less likely to perpetuate sexist stereotypes because they are women.

Generally they will have got to the top of the greasy pole by whatever means necessary - and they will probably still be in the firing line for criticism because of their gender in a way that their male counterparts won't. Their position on that pole is always going to be tenuous! I think sometimes some women in senior positions that they aren't traditionally "supposed" to occupy may feel compelled to be even more critical of women, demonstrate even more compliance with systems and principles that adversely affect women to "show" that they are worthy of those lofty heights. Maybe there's a bit of internalised oppression thrown in there as well.

Now on a side issue, Pixie Lott (who is shit) would she have a recording career if she was the size of Adele?

Also I think that the people above them are men. Most of the media moguls are men - they are still pulling the strings. Rebekah Brooks/Wade was still employed and answered to Rupert Murdoch and his whole empire is misogynistic. Yes she had more power than the average woman in media and probably could have had a more positive influence for women but ultimately she would still have had to answer to a man and she was still working in a male dominated industry.

Definitely internalised oppression going on though as well.

while we're talking about women at (or near) the top of businesses, i leave for work at 6am and on Fridays hear the 'friday boss' slot on R4's today programme. nine times out of ten if it's a woman they are asked about male-dominated boardrooms etc and about quotas etc (men are never asked about this). every time they answer that they don't agree with positive discrimination etc etc, and although i would LOVE one of them to point out that men have been positively discriminated against for centuries so actually any discrimination in favour of women would be redressing the balance, i TOTALLY understand why they are wary of saying anything that people might interpret as saying that they have reached their position through anything other than merit and hard work. they STILL don't have htat freedom

Internalised oppression ? Hmmmm............. it would be interesting to hear R Wade's views now that she has nothing to lose in Murdoch's organisation.

I am not so sure that it isn't a cynical recognition of what seems to matter and therefore sells to large numbers of the female population.

I genuinely puzzle over this issue. As I said in earlier post most of the audience at performances of the PD's would be female, and most of their fanclub would be female...............but that would also true of any boy-band one might care to mention !

I do wonder where these Illumuniati-style groups meet to organise our oppression, abbs

I don't doubt that women are oppressed by ridiculous, unobtainable ideals; I just don't believe there's an organised patriarchy doing the oppressing.

I think it's completely pissy to blame the individual women performers for this sort of thing. They are often young, desperate for success, and to have someone telling them they should refuse to play along with the patriarchy and basically sacrifice their career potential is a fucking big ask. Because one single female performer refusing to play by the rules will change nothing and just lose her career because there are 'loads more out there who will do it. Some of the girls might aim to increase their success and earning power by sexual display temporarily in order to get a different message across - you don't know what they might do in the future. By all means support and encourage female performers who don't want to engage in mainstream sexual display (buy their music, go and see them, seek them out!) but don't call the ones who have decided to compromise 'cheap little tramps'.