Showing posts with label views. Show all posts

Dear Alexander Wang (NSFW)

No Comments »

I woke up to these advertisements for Alexander Wang's new denim line (while scrolling through my Facebook feed. Not actually waking up to them).

Photo from WWD (click to enlarge)

What a way to wake up. I know. 

“Once you see it, you can’t stop thinking about it,” said Wang to WWD.  “It’s not provocative just in terms of sexy, but provocative to provoke conversation. I'm not dictating what that message is exactly. The interesting part is to see how people interpret it, and what they have to say about it. Of course, there are going to be people who disagree with it.” 

You were right on the latter but not the former, Wang. This ad definitely provokes conversation (such as this post or this one on HuffPost) but it is not "provocative in terms of sexy". It does not make me think, "Damn, those jeans are fine. It's so sexy. Anna Ewers makes them look so darned sexy. I need to look and feel that sexy. I need to get those jeans!" Instead, it makes me think, "Where are the jeans?!"

In Communication Studies, we call the strategically placed "Denim X Alexander Wang" an "anchor" which is words put in an ad to give meaning to the photograph because let's face it, without those words, what do viewers get? Tasteful porn, maybe. The advert is supposed to be selling jeans but the first thing that you see is Ewer's cleverly posed body and her "hidden" nipples because everyone knows what's behind those words, Wang. You can't hide them. What it does sell is the sexualisation of women's bodies in a way that is neither tasteful (like lingerie ads) nor elegant not even provocative. Don't even get me started on the shot where Ewers' hand is positioned to look as if she is masturbating. 

Photo from WWD (click to enlarge)
(On Wang's instagram @alexanderwangny, this was a photo teaser that came with the caption "Coming Soon") 

At first when I saw the advert, the first thing that came to my mind was, "Revolutionary. A designer who is not afraid to show that a woman is sexual and that a woman can claim her sexuality without a man." And then, it hit me that this is an advertisement and the object of the advert does not seem to be the jeans but rather a naked Ewers or Ewers' hand between her thighs. It is objectifying the model and thousands of women across the world. It reduces her to a naked body. It reduces her as something to be stared at, to be looked at. It is exploiting a woman's body, her femininity and her sexuality to sell a product that would otherwise be boring.

In fact, the "masturbation" shot disembodies the model, reducing her to just a hand between her thighs. It does not show her face (whether she is in the throes of passion) or anything else to indicate this this is a woman who is confident with her sexuality and is not afraid to show it. 

It does not scream high fashion. It doesn't even scream fashion. It's just a cheap and tired and boring way to grab attention, at the expense of women and feminine sexuality. It is as if you and your company were not confident that your jeans could sell and had to do something over-the-top to do so.

It is as if the jeans are marketed to come off rather than stay on. But, "The Wang 001 is not a “skinny” jean per se, but a “slim” with a high rise to sit at the waist as well as 1 percent stretch for the two indigo washes and 2 percent for the black wash. The Wang 002, or relaxed fit, has zero stretch and is based on a classic men’s fit, but cut for a woman’s body. Then there’s the Wang 003. “We’re not calling them boyfriend jeans,” he said of the boy cut, which rides low and has a wider yet tapered leg. “I hate it when you roll them and your ankle is swimming, so I cut it so you roll it twice and it stays pegged.” (WWD) You has given so much thought into these jeans even citing your inspirations as "female friends and the girls whose style he admires" (WWD) yet it seems no thought has been given to the adverts. 

It is as if you thought, "Sex sells. Let's put a naked girl in jeans. Tons of people will talk about it and buy it." You are an amazing designer, Wang and with all that brimming creativity, I'm sure you could have come up with something better than a naked girl with jeans that are around her ankles. Yes, people will talk about it and because of your reputation, people will buy your jeans but you don't need to objectify a woman to do so. Rely on your reputation, rely on your quality and rely on the fact that your clothes are beautiful. 

In fact, relying on those details in WWD (and if I wasn't so loyal to Guess Jeans), I would buy myself a pair. The jeans sound utterly sexy on their own, Wang. You don't need a naked woman to make them sexy.

Opinion: Traditional Feminism vs. Contemporary Feminism

No Comments »

Warning: Text Heavy. 

It is disconcerting when your identity as a feminist is challenged, especially in just under 12 hours. I have always identified with traditional liberal feminism but tonight, my views have been challenged so greatly that I seem to have lost my feminist identity.

A friend (A) and I were talking about feminism and she shared this link with me. I could not identify with it's contents at all. I understood where the author is coming from and what she is trying to say. I think that kyriarchy could be used to describe the society we live in but at the same time, I did not believe that this movement should be classified under feminism. I believe that including men and the disabled etc under the umbrella of feminism reduces the purpose of the original movement which is "women having equal rights as men."

A agrees with the article and so did another friend (R) I spoke to. A refused to continue on the debate after a while and so I said to R, "No one will debate with me because I am too aggressive."

To this, R replied: "You are not aggressive. But I realise that you do not like the idea of diverting from what is more original."

So, I searched for traditional feminism. And this is where my confusion began.

What is this idea of original that my friend spoke about? 

 Traditional feminism is the fight for equal rights for women as men such as the right to education, women's suffrage, equal pay, work and so much more. On the other hand, contemporary feminism encompasses so much more than just equal rights for men and women. There is choice and sexuality and also the traditional values of education and equal pay. The lines have been so blurred that the feminist identity has also been blurred.

I believe in the traditional qualities of feminism. After all, women today are still discriminated and oppressed. However, when my friends spoke about contemporary feminism, it seems that traditional feminism has no place in the contemporary world.

Perhaps my friend did not intend it as a slight and it was merely an observation but I could not help but feel that I was told to "Move on from your traditionalist views. It is not just about women any more. Men need feminism and so do the disabled and the underprivileged. What's so wrong with it?"

Don't get me wrong, I am all for equal rights for men, the disabled, the underprivileged etc but I can't help but wonder if grouping it together with feminism would have a stronger impact. Feminism, after all, in it's essence is women rights. By introducing other elements, the focus on women would diminish because the concern would be universal. It would be about the oppressed and not just the oppressed women.

Why call it feminism when the disabled is a different cause than women? Sure, the lines are blurred. The disabled also face problems when it comes to discrimination in pay, work and a general distaste. But, how many times have you seen a disabled person get shot in the head for fighting for the right to education? How many times do you hear a disabled person complain that they don't get the same rights as other people do?

Perhaps, it is the verbal and physical discrimination that is their cause. I am not going to say that the disabled or men do not face other problems besides discrimination etc because let's face it, problems exist everywhere. Men are constantly challenged to reclaim their "masculinity" instead of being allowed to express themselves.

However much the lines are blurred, in my opinion, feminism is not the fight for men to be allowed to express themselves or for the disabled to receive the rights that a "normal" person (by society standards) does.

The recognition of male oppression is a result of feminism. When feminists demand that they be equal to men, finally, then do men realise that if women can wear trousers, men can wear skirts. Toys no longer have to be pink or blue or girl toys and boy toys but this is a result of feminism.

It is not feminism itself. It should be recognised as a separate cause.

The fight for the rights of the disabled are a different fight altogether. I apologise but I am not well-versed enough into the fight of the disabled to provide a non-biased and informed comment.

I am still largely confused about my identity. I want to agree with contemporary feminism and the new sectors of feminism that the years have brought on but I am neither a complete traditionalist and neither am I a contemporary feminist.

I believe strongly in traditional values of feminism and I refuse to see other elements tarnishing the traditional views because it diminishes the cause. At the same time, I believe that feminism has brought on a lot of other changes that inspire contemporary feminism and I support these new ideals. However, I don't believe that these new ideals should be tossed in with feminism.

I want to identify with contemporary ideas and the new branches of feminism but at the same time, I am unable to. No one has convinced me otherwise.

Here's a quote I found interesting: Whereas Traditional Feminism teaches that men and women are equal, Modern Feminism teaches that men and women are the same. [Credit]

 Disclaimer: This opinion has not covered linguistics, black feminism, the LGBT community and a lot of other areas. The contents of this post are my personal opinions. All mistakes made are my own.

Opinion: Feminism in an Asian Society

No Comments »


It began with this post on Tailor's [Taylor's] College Confessions Facebook page where a confessor said "I love how guys make me comfortable on bed. <3 Am I a slut?"

The admin on duty responded: "AU: Define "make me comfortable on bed". Do you mean cuddles? If yes, then no, you are not a slut. But if you mean sex, and with many guys, then yes, yes you are a slut." and accompanied her comments with a picture.


Over the next 48 hours or so, the comments were a heated debate of feminism vs. ignorance. 
I called out the admins in the comments on that post and I also personally messaged them to remove the post entirely. 

Here are the responses I received in the personal message as well as my response.



I didn't respond after the last message sent because I knew that my efforts were futile. 

However, the point here is the lack of knowledge as well as understanding of how words can affect a person, especially sexualised terms such as "slut" and "whore". Throughout the comment-debate, none of these admins who have been given the power of regulation and monitoring could acknowledge that they had indeed committed a mistake. 

Instead, they tried to justify it saying that Asians live in a "patriarchal society" [implying as well that Caucasians don't live in a patriarchal society]. Also, they said that the picture was meant to be a "satirical" joke, including "Asians cannot understand satire" [paraphrased]. This is racist.

Also, the confessor had asked for an opinion, hence, it was justified that the admin in question called her a "slut" if she has sex and with many guys. The admin also implied that "cuddling in a bed" did not make her a slut. 

They did not know what slut-shaming was and they were grasping at straws, trying to justify themselves. 
In the end, they stood by their sexist and backward actions and did not remove the post. 

Feminism is seen as something bad and is often criticised in an Asian society. The admins above called our anger and disagreement a "ruckus" which is evident enough. I do not blame the admins for their actions but rather their ignorance at a worldwide issue as well as the society that I come from.

Asian women, since the beginning of time, have been subjugated to men. There is also a saying in Japan that women have to walk three steps behind their husbands, which again reveals the gender bias against women’s rights as equals. [Credit] 

In my observations, even today, in making decisions, Asian women turn to their husbands. A decision cannot be made without consulting the husband. My mother cannot choose to do something, for example, go shopping without asking my father if it was all right. 

Japanese women and men do not mingle after work. Japanese men attend their own parties and so do women. A woman is not allowed to enter the male domain. [I cannot find hard evidence because I read this in a newspaper and I cannot locate the edition and publisher.]

While feminism is also a strange concept in Western countries, the feminist movement has progressively gotten stronger and more people are joining to support equality for all. In Asia, however, to mention that you are a feminist is to get odd looks. Not only do they not understand feminism, they do not know what feminism is. 

Feminism is essentially, to want for women, the same rights as men. 

As a result of our Facebook debate, the admins have labelled us feminists as "feminazis" as well as "bitter towards society". One admin even went the length to say that in Western countries like Switzerland, they could take the picture as a joke and not create a big fuss. 

In Nordic countries such as Switzerland, the level of gender equality is unparalleled. [Credit] They know better than to make a "satirical joke" out of slut-shaming hence, his statement is unjustified. 

It is because of our heritage and history that feminism is such a foreign concept. In fact, some Asians might even say that it is a Western ideal that we do not need.

I think otherwise. I think in Asian countries, feminism is needed the strongest. We need to pull the women out of their "historical" shells and take charge. Make a change in our own lives. Let not anyone else dictate our lives except ourselves.

And to those who ridicule feminists. Here is what I have to say: 

"I am a proud feminist. And if that makes me "bitter towards society" and a feminazi, then you've got the wrong idea of feminism.

We appear "bitter" because we're game changers and those people playing the game don't want their game to be changed because they are content with seeing women get raped and abused. Children are being sold to old men as brides, children are sold into sex. These people call us "bitter" because these situations don't affect them hence they cannot feel the suffering that these women go through. Feminists and activists are trying to change this. Hence, derogatory and negative terms are used to describe us. 

But has that stopped us? No. 
Will it stop us? Never."

Leave a comment and let me know what you think about this situation.

Disclaimer: The contents of this post are my personal opinions. All mistakes made are my own.