Feminists -VS- the Starlets

O'Reilly Hosts Debate: Feminism or Celebrity?

By Miss Faith, published Dec 20, 2006
Published Content: 104  Total Views: 140,441  Favorited By: 13 CPs
Rating: 3.0 of 5
Lindsey, Britney, Nicole and Paris; are they hurting modern day feminism and virtually erasing all of the hard work that has been done up to this point? This is the latest million dollar question over feminism. On December 11th, Bill O'Reilly had a segment about what he called the new "Brat Pack". He began by quoting feminist author Camille Paglia who has called these women "backstreet floozies". He then had Tammy Bruce, progressive feminist, on the Factor. She complained about how these women are not taking control of their sexuality and how they are not using it in a positive way. Bill went on to make comments about how there has always been women of respect and then also so called trollops. So based on this, he wondered why Ms. Bruce was so upset. Her response was, "the 1st thing to do is send them some underwear". She also said that standards are important and women should not act like tramps. Apparently she believes they should be more like Princess Dianna had been. Ms. Bruce had made comments on how the starlets needed to show more class and femininity like Princess Di, instead of acting the way they have been lately. She also stated that the feminist movement was not about Britney being able to show her privates or Madonna showing "expletive" on stage.

So according to this woman and her fellow feminists, women should now be feminine, yet glamorous but should still be strong and active in the workplace, but they should only do it the way the feminist movement has set forth? Apparently she wants a group of mindless super women that fit into the "feminist" mold and nothing else. As much as I wonder why these young stars are acting this way, it doesn't matter to me. They are still women and to me they actually ooze femininity from their pores. Femininity? Did you read that correctly? Yes you did. I think they are very feminine based on what they wear, how they look, and how they act overall. Once you have looked past the lewd acts and focus on the rest of the package, you can see how they are influencing young girls to actually dress and act like girls should. (This is where I will pause and wait for the berating comments.)

Feminists -VS- the Starlets

Britney and Paris hit the town in "festive" attire.

Credit: gareth

Copyright: gareth

Takeaways
  • The new "Brat Pack" according to Bill O'Reilly: Lindsey, Paris, and Britney.
  • Are these 3 out of control or just being rambunctious girls?
  • Why on earth are the feminists complaining? Because these 3 are misusing the feminine freedoms allotted to them.
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 6 of 6
 
 
Spider Lady a say pretty is a pretty does. I thank God for the Feminist Movement and the fact that I do not have to have six children like my mother did... I don't think it is them feminist that makes this starlets think acting like whores makes them popular, it is the misogynist media that these ladies have grown up exposed to. I am sorry but the people with the real buck behind it all are men who would sell their mother for a buck. I think the media has given the young women the idea that with way to be equal to a man is to accept male values and score as much as the men try to. I think we need more emergence of feminine values.

Posted on 12/16/2007 at 2:12:02 PM

 
attractive; that they must be this giving of themselves sexually, or they're not living up to cultural expectations, and aren't desirable enough as compared to others. For the woman participating in the burlesque show, following the pole dancing exercise class, wearing barely there skirts, it may be sexual expression, but who's to say that there aren't still the large cadre of men looking at her and going, "yes! boobs!" So in the long run, is it women using their bodies to gain power over men, or men using their power to get women to show their bodies? For the starlets, they've been rich and famous long enough to make personal choices with some freedom (I mean geez, look at Britney), so maybe the first. For the rest of society, maybe the latter.

Posted on 03/03/2007 at 2:03:00 PM

 
I don't know about all of this. First of all, Bill O'Reilly really is in no position to say what does or doesn't constitute feminism (and as a dashing young man, neither do I, but O'Reilly really has no place talking about how to properly fight patriarchal oppression when he was famously trying to use his assistant as a sexual object, in the process offering stories about the prostitutes he slept with) - for whatever he brings up, he's likely only doing so for whatever his general social ideologies have to gain from it. There are really two sides to this. In a perfect world, people could do or act or dress however they wanted if it wasn't doing harm to anyone, and sure, criticism of said "starlets" can seem awfully similar at times to the classic, destructive virgin vs. whore paradigm (are you listening, Bill?), but you have to remember, if this is what pop culture is being fed to the general population, girls AND boys are going to have an expectation that girls must be this attra

Posted on 03/03/2007 at 2:03:00 PM

 
I don't agree that their actions have anything to do with feminism but I do agree that they are out of control. That feminism gave them their oppertunity doesn't mean it caused it. There have been bad seeds in the world of women long before feminism emerged. I don't agree with their actions either, and I don't believe any of them need any children until they shape up their act. It's not feminism that permits them to act this way; it's the fact that they are famous and are thus considered above the law.

Posted on 01/28/2007 at 3:01:00 PM

 
Teresa - Thanks for your opinion on this. However, I still have to stand behind the fact that had the feminist movement not taken place nor had feminists "empowered" women across the country then these women wouldn't have the power they have today. They wouldn't be "starlets" but perhaps respected celebrities. It is the feminist movement that tells them that they are allowed to have power and children but still do what they want since it is their lives. Without feminism they wouldn't be permitted to act the way they do. However the feminists still look down at them for how they act. I don't agree with their actions, especially having children, but if you help make the monster you can't complain about what the monster does.

Posted on 01/19/2007 at 7:01:00 PM

 
I'm all for live and let live, but if I had an impressionable teen or young girl living in my home the last people I'd want them to emulate are any of those you mentioned. Their fashion sense is questionable, their behavior embarassing, and if it weren't for the fluff news constantly putting them in the forefront who would know they exist? None of them have done anything to warrant the exposure they receive. The very idea that the feminist movement "made" these very selfish, out of control young women is an escapist attitude that says, "it's not my fault..." They make choices every day just like the rest of us, unfortunately they make bad choices. Also.. I would not call these adult women, "rambunctious girls." They are adults some with children. They're many many young women who are wildly successful who are indeed making a difference in their own ways, to select three that exhibit such ridiculous behavior and blame it on the feminist movement seems to be without basis.

Posted on 12/22/2006 at 8:12:00 AM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 6 of 6
 
Most Commented On