About 18 months ago I wrote a long letter to my local newspaper. There had been a column that had focused on young girls and sexuality and how to raise strong daughters with good body image in the onslaught of Madison Ave's over reliance on "Sex Sells".
Anyone who has struggled to dress a daughter in age-appropriate clothes will appreciate that it's an uphill battle.
Well, the topic is back, in a different form. This time it's rolling down the curve of Janet Jackson's breast.
So why all the public outcry? I posit it's our national schzophrenia with sex and sexuality, with the body and sensuality, with classic Madonna/Whore stereotypes.
It seems perfectly right (and in some ways I'm delighted) to see our deepest insecurites played out on the most public of American stages - the war game of football - and especially during the most watched program of the year.
Some say it was just "disgusting!", when Justin Whatshisname ripped the bodice/breastplate off of Janet's costume to reveal a breast, adorned with a sundial nipple ... thing (not a ring - I've seen the close ups
No doubt it was in bad taste. Isn't most pop culture? What construct makes it so important that our teenagers suddenly grow up and develop the ability to distinguish weird/gross from Cool? Weren't we the ones wearing leg warmers, polyester, enough hairspray to eat the ozone and blue eyeshadow?! (Oh yeah, the eyeshadow's back. Still weird.)
Yeah - the ripping off part was over the top. I don't like young girls getting the impression that that approach is "cool" or even normal.
But it wasn't the breast that was offensive. It was the trappings, it was the set! Europeans are belly laughing at our national prudishness - "Gasp! A woman's breast!!" we collectively swooned.
Puhleez. It's a gorgeous part of the human body - crafted with infinite wisdom to nourish our children. That it has become sexualized for cheap shock value at a concert (and infinite other public displays) speaks only to our inability to recognize the original purpose of breasts!
Sure, it's beauty as a symbol of life is easy to usurp into sexuality, but only because the breast is a sensual object literally from the very moment of that other miracle, birth.
If you think it isn't hard wired into our brains, witness all the oral fixations we share: smoking, emotional eating, sipping at dinner parties where we are nervous and seek comfort from putting food and drink into our mouths, (the tool by which we first discovered the world). What a better way to settle anxiety, than by nibbling? If we were more honest, we'd just put nipples on beer bottles.
Still, all this schzoidness isn't a good thing. If Ashcroft can feel justified in having the breasts of a nude statue in the Justice Dept, (a PUBLIC domain) draped, then indeed it's no wonder women are embarrassed to bare even a smidgen of skin when breastfeeding their babies.
If we can't bring ourselves to teach our kids about condoms and masturbation as a part of normal sex ed, how can we expect them to learn to control (or at least harness) this most powerful of life forces - the urge to satiate a basic physical need?
All adults have had times of overpowering lust, so how can we expect our kids to simply abstain? In our silence and discomfort, are we teaching them that sex is too powerful to really even discuss? Talk about making something more fascinating because it is taboo.
At issue, in my mind, is the split between our preoccupation with sex and our inability to appreciate the human body as a work of art, a thing of beauty.
Europeans truly don't have this conflict, and so take nudity in stride. Therefore they aren't as "Wowed" by the Sex Sells campaigns.
Maybe having nude statues everywhere is a good idea.
So let Janet have her day. The breast was fine. I hope she nourishes her children on it one day. The show was bad - not especially "dirty", just same old teenage entertainment milieu. Kind of pointless and over-pyrotechic-ed.
Maybe instead of just being more restrictive with bad shows, we should be more open with beauty and art. Can we replace all those ugly reality shows with something more soulful?
Oh yeah, that's why we don't have cable... 100 channels and nothing good on.
Is a public backlash justified? Maybe, but it's going on now for the wrong reasons. Is it worth the effort? My cynical side says fuggetaboutit, but my optimist says "Go for it! And let's get rid of public spitting too!"
p.s. And btw, if I had booked it the show Tina Turner would have rocked! She's one hot mama.
Posted by Vicki at February 17, 2004 07:08 PM