That’s Some Loud Underwear You’ve Got There

Yay! I got another article published at The Shake.

I should post it on my blog.

But wait.  I just posted yesterday.  I should wait a day or two before posting this one.  I’m bad enough about updating regularly – I should spread the love out.  If I start posting twice in one day, they’ll think I’m on some kind of writing spree, and get all spoiled.

I’ll wait a day.  Yeah, that’s a good idea.

And then I’ll write a really interesting intro, so it doesn’t feel like I’m just sending them a link and shooing them away.

Except…. Oh, geez.  SQUID!  THE YOGURT IS NOT FOR FINGERPAINTING THE DOG.  GROSS.  You either eat it or you put it on the counter….NO.  I MEANT EAT THE YOGURT IN THE CONTAINER, NOT LICK IT OFF THE DOG.  STOP.  I’m not joking, little man.  STOP, RIGHT NOW, OR YOU’RE GONNA PUT YOUR NOSE IN THE CORNER UNTIL YOU’RE 20.

Has he stopped?

Nope.

If you’ll excuse me, I’m off to put a kid in the corner.

Edit:

I did a little more research and discovered that the undies I wrote on was a marketing prank done by a feminist group to raise awareness of how sexist Victoria’s Secret underwear is…. which, the more I think about it, just makes it seem even sillier.

I actu
ally researched it before I wrote about it, but I didn’t do a good enough job. BAD, Becky. Bad. Go get the Cone of Shame.

Also, I’m bummed, because I missed the chance to make fun of the angry feminists instead of Victoria’s Secret. Boo.

Ah, well.  It was a good lesson to learn.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “That’s Some Loud Underwear You’ve Got There

  1. omgosh you just reminded me of

    GET THAT DIAPER OFF YOUR HEAD AND PUT IT BACK ON YOUR SISTER!!!!

    (raising arizona, best movie ever made)

    btw, i think your oldest in the photo was voicing, “PICTURE!” and the photo caught him in the U part of the word picture. that's my theory from 8k km away.

    Like

  2. I don't really know how to put my thoughts about this into writing. I just got this upset and disappointed feeling in my gut after reading your article and your comments about it here.

    I'm a long time reader of this blog and I have always liked your style and agreed with most of your opinions, but like I said, this just kind of upsets me.

    Why would you write and article about something without doing any background info search for it? If you had done any, you would have most certainly found out what those ads were really about (and where they were from).

    I personally think those undies look great and it's great that they used varying body types to model them (you know, unlike the ACTUAL Victoria's Secrets).

    They're not supposed to stop rapists on their tracks or something. They're supposed to raise awareness and start conversations. Which they do.

    The problems with rape culture and consent giving are not going to go away unless they are publicly discussed.

    I guess I'd understand your points better if, once you realized this was prank, you would've found out a little bit more about what's behind “stunts” like this. Instead you just went like “lol, silly feminists” and that's it.

    Like

  3. Heya Unknown,

    I freely admit I felt like a huge moron once I figured out what I'd done – I actually did start to do research to make sure I wasn't passing along incorrect info… but the first article was an antique article that also believed it was true… and then I clicked on another article from that article that also fell for it… and then I went onto a similar article….

    And then 30 minutes later I realized I'd been reading about the origins of tramp stamps and how to make sugar free jello from scratch, and that if I didn't quit Googling stuff I'd never get my daily quota of writing done, so I shut down Firefox and started typing.

    It wasn't until the magazine ran the article and I went back to look up something that I realized my stupidity – and let the magazine know immediately. I felt pretty stupid – I think we can all agree that hard-hitting investigative journalist is off of my career table.

    I know I'm going to make some people angry, but my stance really hasn't changed – I found the notion of the underwear offensive, which is why I poked fun at it. I did go to the webpage of the people who created the prank (I was the one who sent The Shake the link) and read through why they did it…. and I still respectfully disagree with their stance. It bothers me more that they would do it than if a marketing team came up with the idea as an attempt to make more money.

    You don't start conversations with your vagina/butt. You should start them with your mouth. If they'd printed them on a t-shirt(Victoria Secret sells plenty of clothes, so they could have used those), sure. If they'd pretended they were goign to be printed on the butt of their sweats – I'd still mock, but I'd get it. But on the crotch of sexy underwear? It's a bit silly, and it ignores the root of the point they're trying to address.

    Also, rape culture exists across genders. Women rape men, men rape other men, and there's a whole world of innocent little boys who survive rough childhoods. The entire website only talked about women, and women getting raped, and what women should do about it… DUDE. That's pretty belittling to men who have survived the trauma, and it's a hugepet peeve of mine.

    Also, I dunno – maybe I just know more rape victims than most, but when I thought of people I know and love being confronted with triggers like this in the name of “Bring it to the LIGHT!”… it just felt really insensitive, and not the answer at ALL. It'd be like creating a t-shirt saying “Let's Talk About Your Little Kid Shriveling Up And Dying From Cancer” as a way to raise awareness of Juvenile Leukemia. Just…. No. Maybe if they'd talked about donating the cancer to Rape & Sexual Abuse Survivor networks, or something…. but they didn't go that route.

    I also find the use of obese models (I'm talking about the one really big chick – the chick I used in the article could be considered just lush, or voluptuous.) just as annoying as I'm-strung-out-on-heroin models. Neither one is healthy, so why idolize it?

    Anyways, I don't think satire is something I'll be pursuing anytime soon, so I wouldn't worry about finding it too much on this blog in the future. My intention was never to make anyone upset.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s