The new Megan Fox.

 Shia Labouf talks Megan Fox.

The new transformers movie is going to come out this summer, but this time the lead female role and love interest will no longer be played by the beloved by men Megan Fox.  This time around, director Michael Bay has chosen Victoria's secret model Rosie Hunington-Whitely-a tall blond-as Megan Fox's replacement.  This New York Times article features an interview with Shia Labouf about the departure of Megan Fox from the third Transformers installment, and he speaks of Fox's insecurities of being put in the spotlight essentially through one film series and subsequently being perceived as the sexiest woman in America.  He talks about how she was uncomfortable with Michael Bay's demands for the role, which didn't involve a lot of lines, but rather sexy poses and a lot plain old "looking hot."  This article perfectly ties into the idea of the male gaze and the fetishistic perception of an ideal woman being portrayed through a camera lens.  Since Fox no longer felt comfortable doing the same thing for three films in a row, he ended up hiring an alternate that happens to be a Victoria Secret model; obviously sexy poses are what she does for a living so this acting job would not be much of an insecurity issue for her.  It is fascinating to see how directors will use woman in order to make money, because for example, this is Rosie's first acting job.  It proves that the image of a woman's body is the ideal way of making profit of a big Hollywood Blockbuster in America.

Cheryl Cole is out.

Recently, Cheryl Cole had been axed from the US version of X Factor after only two episodes.  Simon Cowell himself was excited to bring her along as one of his British sidekicks on the show, but the true reasoning as to why she had been dumped from the show is unknown.  Speculations arise that the reason she may have been let go is because of her think British accent and fear that the American public may not understand her.  There have also been other rumors pertaining to her having to shape up her image to be more visually pleasing to the American Public, and instead has been offered a judging spot on the UK version of the show.  Cole did not accept the offer and the reason of her departure remains unknown as of yet, but many factors contribute to there being some truth behind the rumors.  Pussycat Doll singer Nicole Scherzinger became her replacement, and Kelly Rowland is to judge the UK version.  It is a mystery why it only took two episodes for her to get released, and shows a very hegemonic way of dealing with the issues if the rumors are true.  By using the pretext that she is hard to understand, it proves that Americans prefer to listen and see only what is most comfortable and pleasing as the UK singer's expense. 

link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/may/30/cheryl-cole-x-factor-judging-panel

Ignorance in its purest form.

I came across this article in Marie Claire Magazine which is obviously a magazine that is directed towards women, fashion and beauty.  The article is titled, "Should Fatties Get a Room? (Even on TV)" and it talks about the new CBS sitcom Mike and Molly.  This article truly upset me because not only does Maura Kelly contradict herself over three times in the article, but is rude and disrespectful to anyone struggling with issues with weight.  By even titling the article with the word "Fatties" makes people that are overweight seem like complete outcasts and inhuman.  She clearly states; "So anyway, yes, I think I'd be grossed out if I had to watch two characters with rolls and rolls of fat kissing each other ... because I'd be grossed out if I had to watch them doing anything. To be brutally honest, even in real life, I find it aesthetically displeasing to watch a very, very fat person simply walk across a room — just like I'd find it distressing if I saw a very drunk person stumbling across a bar or a heroine addict slumping in a chair."  A sentence later she says "Don't get me wrong..."  So the problem lies here that by making it seem like overweight people are undeserving of not only love, but anything really unless they lose weight, the "male gaze" subsequenly is further encouraged with images in media of what is a more socially acceptable body type.  Because these people may be more "aesthetically displeasing" to look at to her and others arguably, it diminishes what is the common perception of regularly shown heterosexual couples on television.  Therefore, a fetishistic view within scopephielia is not possible, and further encouraged.  What bothers me is the fact that she is truly ignorant to many issues going on in America, including the present "food deserts" in certain underprivileged communities.  She states that overweight people should simply get up and get moving, buy healthy food, and "stand" as much as possible.  She is not aware though, that many times the socioeconomic status and location of individuals does not allow for this, because if a grocery store is not present within a 10 mile radius, chances are a gym isn't either.  She may be lucky to be able to attend a gym in her high society fashion editor life style, but it is not fair to ignorantly publish an article pertaining to only a fraction of the population that can allow for the luxuries of the gym and healthy eating. 

Read more: Mike and Molly Show - Overweight Couples on Television - Marie Claire

"Someday" he will be my boyfriend.

This actually sort of makes me happy even though I am not a fan of his or necessarily understand "Bieber Fever."  This is a commercial for his new fragrance-for women-called "Someday."  First, I like that this challenges the norms of male perception within society.  Justin Bieber is well aware of the fact that an overwhelming majority of his fans are girls, and most of his appeal is projected solely onto them.  What I really like is that by making this commercial, which is directed towards a female fragrance, he is not trying to challenge the fact that he is not necessarily perceived a masculine figure in media, but rather a teen heartthrob with his boyish look and baby face despite his age.  The point is, men typically do not look up to him for any reason.  In this commercial, Bieber is embracing the fact that his audience is predominantly female, and challenges what a lot of other known "heartthrobs" have done in the past with products.  Almost every time a male entertainer/athlete/celebrity has released a fragrance it was strictly directed towards men, with commercials showcasing that the male fragrance will attract the woman.  This commercial uses a clever reverse psychology; using the female fragrance as an aid in attracting a male, in this case Justin Bieber himself.  Though this may only be a tactic in order to expand his already large female audience as well as a huge money maker, it still shows a type of confidence coming from Bieber about being comfortable enough to do this.  Most men in his position would try extremely hard to shed a heartthrob image by straying away from what actually is making them a heartthrob (feeding into female attention), but Bieber simply embraces it and it shows an internal masculine confidence.

Censorship to a whole new level.

The new issue of Dossier magazine features male model Andrej Pejic, who happens to look very androgynous.  Barnes and Noble bookstore have decided to censor this particular issue using an opaque black covering on the magazine's cover in fear of customers mistaking the male model for a woman.  Barnes and Noble is currently the largest bookstore in the continental US and is aware of the fact that when these issues of Dossier came out featuring this model, they knew he is indeed a male.  The problem here obviously lies within the public perception and ignorance to what the gender of this person actually is; it poses a question on gender perception within society.  As featured in the image, Pejic is clearly not the first shirtless male on a magazine cover, but his thin build and feminine face contrast with the built, shirtless models featured on many men's magazines.  Dossier being a culture and arts journal may play a role in the fact that he is not posing in order to promote masculinity, but instead high fashion-which is known to be open to gender ambiguity.  This, not necessarily being the "norm" to the general public, with high fashion having a particular subculture audience, may cause for customer complaints due to offensiveness, lack of censorship, and ignorance.  Barnes and Noble, being only a small percentage of world wide sales of this issue, does not pose a huge a threat in deficit in sales, but it does play a role on social perception of others based on gender ambiguity.  Many people are not used to seeing such individuals portrayed in the media; to them this is not the norm.  Consequently, what is not the norm is also not comfortable and may be viewed as unsafe for a child walking into the store to view as an example.  This poses a commentary on how the public teaches children of "norms" from a young age, and deems anything other than the norm as offensive and uncomfortable, unfortunately.

Article: http://jezebel.com/5802115/barnes--noble-censors-cover-featuring-androgynous-male-model

"Blackface"

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7357648n

Recently, Beyonce did a photo shoot with for French magazine L'Officiel Paris.  It was a shoot that used her as a symbol for racial reconnection though particular ethnic clothing choice and makeup making her skin appear much darker than it is in reality.  The photo shoot was aimed to be a tribute to Nigerian cultural roots, but sparked much controversy because of the fact that Beyonce's skin was darkened with makeup.  This sparked controversy due to the fact that this was something done in America during times of cultural oppression to represent black people.  Though I personally find this to be merely a tribute to the Nigerian culture, I do think it is rather interesting how it is highly taken into account the details are.  The details meaning not just the "blackface," but the choice of clothing being seemingly animalistic and tribal, assuming that all Nigerians are not as civilized as whites and wear clothing that make them appear stereotypically fierce and wild.  This is done keenly by using Beyonce, who happens to be of African decent, as the model.  If this had been a model that had not been of African decent, it may have been looked at as even more offensive and controversial (i.e the America's Next Top Model episode) Beyonce, being an artist who posses her alter ego as a woman named "Sasha Fierce" allowed for the magazine's editors to use her for the editorial thinking she would be the good figure to represent this culture.  Still, regardless of her race and artist portrayal, the public found this to be offensive and controversial do to American history of societal oppression through similar representations of blacks.

Maddow vs. Cooper

Rachel Maddow believes that network anchors should come out of the closet openly to the public simply being network anchors.  Her most recent comments led to speculation whether or not she was specifically referring to Anderson Cooper, even though she insists they were not.  Either way, Anderson Cooper, though never openly stating to the public that he is gay, has been photographed with his partner on a few occasions.  This obviously leads to the public automatically assuming her comments may covertly be directed towards the popular CNN anchor.

Maddow stated, "I do think that if you're gay you have a responsibility to come out." when referring to network anchors.  She uses the word "responsibility" which I personally find a little bit forward because it is by no means anyone's responsibility who is homosexual to come out.  A person's sexuality, whatever it may be, is their business and only their business.  It may be believed to be a concern solely when it comes to personal views on politics-left wing or right wing, but if he stays neutral on his show, it should not be a big deal.  Coming out is no ones "responsibility" as it already hard enough for any individual who is gay.  In contrast, Maddow's comments where irresponsible and uncalled for.

Third time's the charm.

As many may have heard, Lindsay Lohan has been sentenced to jail time along with community service once again.  A part of me feels bad, it's like it never ends for the girl.  For Lindsay it should start feeling a like second home by now, but this time not only is she getting jail time for the third time in a row for her necklace theft case, but she is also getting sentenced to community service work both at the Downtown Women's Center in Los Angeles but also to janitorial work at a Morgue, where she will indeed see dead bodies.

Judge Sautner's intentions are clear here-she is not going off easy on her by any means, especially with her notorious victim mentality, carelessness, and unrealistic mentality of what her life really looks like at the moment.  A few years back, Lindsay was a "star."  Young, hot, the next big thing, you name it, but we have to remember-this was almost a decade ago and quite frankly there is new talent out there that can do her job just as well as-or better than she might have done back in 2004.  She wants to regain her significance within the film industry, but she is up against raw amazing talent that does not have all these mishaps going on in their lives.  For Lindsay it's a tough call now, because not many directors will have her in mind as their first choice.  Lindsay still wants to prove herself as an actress even recently scoring a confirmed new gig on a Gotti biopic (which has been confirmed after speculation and rumors).  Unfortunately, in the eyes of the judges, attorneys, film execs, and the public, she cannot be taken seriously at this point.  She is on the receiving end of the information that is being slapped straight in her face, with a sentence that has no room for her have any sort of leeway in.  She may play the victim role well, but the girl needs to stop with her tremendous sense of entitlement which shows through her choice of dress to court (the world is her runway), her still going to clubs (despite that being the trigger for her drinking and drug use), and looking for acting jobs during this time.  As trite as it may sound, Lindsay needs a reality check, and maybe the best one for her will be viewing dead bodies-a sentence unlike any others she's had so far.  She needs to pick herself up by separating herself from everything that she knows and build herself up even if it hurts a bit.

Am I being old fashioned?

It's rather interesting that that is a phrase that is increasingly becoming more and more popular within adults in America, but rather more prominently-young adults.  Nothing pisses off a 20-something year old than a kid with an iphone.  Over the weekend I babysat at a very wealthy family's home, where I witnessed something that I was a bit shocked with, and this was the fact that the 2, 5, and 13 year olds all had working iphones. I decided to blog.

The article "iPhones and Children: A Psych Problem Waiting To Happen?" sheds some light on this growing societal trend of children, increasingly younger and younger getting there hands on technology that is mainly used by adults for business purposes, as well as some pleasures such as phone calls, texting, internet, and music.  Though it is understandable that society is "moving forward" and newer parents want to play the role of givers as well as "the cool parents" from very early on, is it really necessary for a child who cannot even read yet to be given an iphone? The author of the article, Stephen Shankland, states of his 3 year old, "He loves to type nonsense words on the notepad application using the virtual keyboard, deleting them once they've been read." That statement alone proves my point.  Though it may seem innocent at first, it is a little bit scary to see how technology in general is speeding up a child's process of learning and developing, maybe a little too quickly.  Not only that, but a child is essentially stripped of a childhood as they are being granted more and more of what they want from way too early on.  This can can cause problems later on life with snooping, children becoming spoiled, and children becoming unecessarly corrupted.  I blame the parents.

Maybe I am old fashioned, but this leaves little time for a kid to go outside and play as his or her own playtime is in the palm of their hands.  I still remember my first cell phone, which was the nokia "brick phone" in 7th or 8th grade. Even that may seem too early for someone who is significantly older than me.


article link: http://www.ismashphone.com/2010/10/iphones-and-children-a-psych-problem-waiting-to-happen.html

All eyes on the princess.

As the days are approaching to the Royal wedding, naturally, the media is speculating every single move that the royal couple is making.  This includes the increasing focus on Kate Middleton's figure.  There have been many media speculations about Ms. Middleton taking on a dangerous "Dukan" diet, better known in France and similar to the Atkin's diet, in order to shed a few pounds before the big day. 

With the American public being already so obsessed with body image and looks, more so than in England, this added emphasis on speculating Kate Middleton's health because of pre-wedding dieting makes for more media stories.  The American public loves controversy, and though Kate has been looking slightly thinner than usual, it is hardly alarming.  Media outlets are now focusing on calling her "bridezilla" rather than a soon to be "blushing bride." They are focusing too much on labeling her hard headed, and maybe exuding too much determination.  Maybe this persistence to look her best reflects many other character traits that may suggest her abilities to be pragmatic.  Though there are no true sources weighing in on her taking part in this diet, there mere fact that the media is posing the possibility of this in order to make a good story is a bit alarming.  This also proves that Americans are less concerned about her taking on a royal title, and being able to fulfill her duties the right way having little political experience.