2008 Woodie Awards
Leave Britney alone
Guest Column
Samantha Korb
Issue date: 9/25/07 Section: Opinions
Britney Spears. Yes, we are still talking about her, but not for the reasons that one might think. I am not here to tell her to go home and take care of her kids, to put her clothes back on, or to go rehab, but, yes, I am telling you to leave Britney Spears alone (I am not Chris Crocker, I've never been a fan of Britney Spears, but I must admit, "Toxic" is a catchy song).
Her "comeback" was hyped as the performance that would have mirrored John Elway's fourth-quarter heroics or been similar to the turnaround Mariah Carey saw from Glitter. However, anyone not living under a rock realized that expectations fell way short. Perez Hilton and other celebrity bloggers couldn't contain themselves with their instant updates on how she staggered across stage, how she could not sing (or rather, lip sync) her song, and the theme of that night was "Gimme Less … Not More" for Britney. While her performance was the antithesis of stellar, one thing just simply isn't true: Britney Spears is not fat.
If size 0 was considered the average dress size, then yes, she would be considered fat, but Britney Spears fat? Next thing you know Paris Hilton will be censored for not showing enough of her rib cage. But this is the America we live in and have lived in for decades. Where, for women, the appearance of one's body and the sexualization of that body is not only acceptable, it's encouraged and celebrated.
It would be impossible to open up an issue of any publication from Rolling Stone to Redbook and not be bombarded with the expectation of being deathly thin. This idea of contrived sexuality and beauty is sold in many forms, from advertisements of toothpaste to airbrushed magazine covers of those considered "glamorous" in our society. What we are told to be, with images, not words. And while this is no news for anyone, especially those who are women in our society, it bears repeating.
So it is not surprising to me that one of the first things people talked about was Britney's weight. A close male friend of mine said, "Well, she is paid to look [deathly skinny] so she must fit that image." I can't argue that she is paid to look skinnier than most women in our society, but the shape Britney had at her performance was a more healthy weight than I have ever seen before in her career, and she is still being criticized.
Her "comeback" was hyped as the performance that would have mirrored John Elway's fourth-quarter heroics or been similar to the turnaround Mariah Carey saw from Glitter. However, anyone not living under a rock realized that expectations fell way short. Perez Hilton and other celebrity bloggers couldn't contain themselves with their instant updates on how she staggered across stage, how she could not sing (or rather, lip sync) her song, and the theme of that night was "Gimme Less … Not More" for Britney. While her performance was the antithesis of stellar, one thing just simply isn't true: Britney Spears is not fat.
If size 0 was considered the average dress size, then yes, she would be considered fat, but Britney Spears fat? Next thing you know Paris Hilton will be censored for not showing enough of her rib cage. But this is the America we live in and have lived in for decades. Where, for women, the appearance of one's body and the sexualization of that body is not only acceptable, it's encouraged and celebrated.
It would be impossible to open up an issue of any publication from Rolling Stone to Redbook and not be bombarded with the expectation of being deathly thin. This idea of contrived sexuality and beauty is sold in many forms, from advertisements of toothpaste to airbrushed magazine covers of those considered "glamorous" in our society. What we are told to be, with images, not words. And while this is no news for anyone, especially those who are women in our society, it bears repeating.
So it is not surprising to me that one of the first things people talked about was Britney's weight. A close male friend of mine said, "Well, she is paid to look [deathly skinny] so she must fit that image." I can't argue that she is paid to look skinnier than most women in our society, but the shape Britney had at her performance was a more healthy weight than I have ever seen before in her career, and she is still being criticized.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
Amy Bodsford
posted 9/26/07 @ 1:15 PM EST
Awesome article Samantha!!!
BigE
posted 9/26/07 @ 9:49 PM EST
Who CARES about Britney Spears? Besides being a no-talent to begin with, her career is over-- if she ever really had one. She can't play an instrument and can't read music, yet I'm supposed to believe she "writes her own songs"---RIGHT. (Continued…)
Samantha
posted 9/28/07 @ 2:35 AM EST
I am not going to disagree about Britney Spears and her lack of talent. My point in writing the article, was yes, to bring attention to her, but for the reasons no one has talked about before, to serve as a catalyst to spark a discussion about body weight, and images, expectations and perceptions of women (and men) in advertising and Hollywood. (Continued…)
lovelylindylady
Catherine
posted 10/03/07 @ 9:46 PM EST
I agree with you, Samantha. Body image is a huge deal, especially since we are on our own now and feeding ourselves. If the pressure is on to be thin, we can skip a few meals a weeks without the notice of a parent. (Continued…)
Post a Comment