-
Adieu, Adieu, Remember Me
March 25, 2011 | 39 comments
-
DeMint's Defense of RomneyCare is Ignorant...And Dangerous
March 17, 2011 | 85 comments
-
McConnell Pushing Vote to Block the EPA from Regulating Carbon Emissions
March 17, 2011 | 9 comments
-
More Barbour on Afghanistan
March 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
House Passes Three Week Spending Bill
March 15, 2011 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Sometimes I wonder what separates conservatives from liberals and libertarians on a gut level, before we really get into sorting through individual issues. When it comes to the role of government, I often side with libertarians on social issues (such as the legalization of drugs and on gay marriage), but once we move beyond the realm of what should be allowed by law, I'm more traditionalist. And I think that's one of the reasons why I end up identifying as a conservative.
This photo spread in the French version of Vogue is a good example of the fault line I'm talking about. I posted two images below so as not to clog up the entire blog, but you can see the rest here.
My initial reaction, before any intellectualizing gets involved, was, it's pretty appalling to mock the concept of motherhood and glamorize neglectful behavior that actually causes physical damage to the fetus.
Yet over at Jezebel, blogger Tabitha loves the spread, and expresses regret that it wouldn't be possible in the U.S. because of the puritanical nature of our society. She writes:
French Vogue found the tenderness in mothering, but also the humor, the wackiness, the suggestion that it isn't perhaps natural to all women, and the surprise....
Can you imagine the reader outrage if a similarly unsentimental editorial take on motherhood ever slipped past the censors at Condé Nast USA?
Jill, over at the blog Feministe, concurs with Tabitha, and there's some debate in the comments to her post. One commenter writes: "Love it! I am so sick of the cult of the mother that has been growing to epic proportions in this country. It’s ridiculous."
In my view, the fact that cultural taboos such as this exist in America is positive, yet to Tabitha and evidently this commenter, it's something that makes us boring and backward compared to our culturally enlightened counterparts in Europe. I could be wrong, but I think showing these photos to somebody and asking, "What do you see here?" would be a good indication of where that person stands politically.
View all comments (54) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Philip Klein
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/04/02/a-conservative-rorschach-test
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Pearls of Pauline
- The Continuing Crisis
- Let's Return to the Gold Standard
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Crusader| 4.2.09 @ 12:07PM
What do I see here?
Hmmmm---
A selfish whore and a welfare baby?
Pingback| 4.2.09 @ 12:17PM
Michelle Malkin » Afternoon conservative Rorschach test links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.2.09 @ 12:20PM
Afternoon conservative Rorschach test — But As For Me links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Jiggy| 4.2.09 @ 12:23PM
THIS IS NOT FUNNY.
There's nothing to compare between the Real American Conservatives from the fake American libertarians and liberals.
Ann Noid| 4.2.09 @ 12:35PM
I see a liberal nut. Except that this one actually HAD the child, so i'll stick with selfish whore and welfare baby.
The idea that this image does anything other than disgust a viewer confirms my worst fears for this society.
-PROUD (and damn good) mom
Morris| 4.2.09 @ 12:45PM
What I see is societal narcissism, that these women don't see the honor in motherhood (and in fact see it as a "cult") is absolutely at the heart of our societies illness.
As George Washington stated;
"Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society."
On Morality and Religion: ""[V]irtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government . . . Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim tribute to patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness -- these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And, . . . whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on the minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles."
We as a a society for the past 100 years (at least) have been losing our religion and morality. Our free society cannot function if we have citizens who think these pictures are acceptable.
di buter| 4.2.09 @ 12:45PM
Crack whore model who ditches baby to have a smoke?? Is this supposed to be KATE MOSS? From what I understand she still parties every night until about 4 am and her kid, about 4 now, is raised by a nanny. Now that I think about it, it sounds like ALL of Hollyweird. And most of the libs who have kids, seemingly grudgingly, and ditches them on whomever they can pay to take care of them, so they can go back to their ME, ME , ME life. Mothers, no matter the day and age, should be revered. I am only 43, and I think this is bs. Feminist- women who hate men, kids, and anyone else not absorbed in their daily angst. GAGGGGGG.
Bob| 4.2.09 @ 12:54PM
Philip -- I know you didn't miss the point of this -- IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DISGUSTING. You can be disgusted by the photo and thus LIKE the campaign. Are you confusing the two?
Jenny Bea| 4.2.09 @ 1:10PM
Selfish Welfare Whore (they are socialists after all) sums it up nicely. Did any of you read the article? "Shoot up wit ze bottle"? I mean, what? I understand their trying to say that motherhood now-a-days isn't like the 50's. Great- take some pics of Angelina Jolie, or something. But these condone the disregard for the job at hand.
Pingback| 4.2.09 @ 2:06PM
Thursday’s Picks :: Daily Uprising links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Angel| 4.2.09 @ 2:11PM
Well, if you can abort your baby up to nine months gestation--what does a few more months matter? Suddenly, you're all maternal? Don't think so.
Mike| 4.2.09 @ 2:20PM
I have to say reading the first paragraph that Philip wrote I identified with 100%, that is me to a tee.
Now going through and reading the posts I guess that I am not seeing beyond the image itself. I got out of it that even trashy women need nice under garments. OH and they have some nice legs. va va varoom!!
Angel| 4.2.09 @ 2:21PM
My daughter's college professor (a large, very angry woman), at UC Irvine told her class that pre-term babies were parasites. My daughter was horrified, absolutely hated that woman, and she left the school after that semester. She transferred to a private University, and with the help of grants and loans, she graduated last year with honors. Liberalism is a mental illness; they are so full of hatred.
Heather| 4.2.09 @ 2:24PM
Yeah, and they got some nice STDs, too! va va varoom!!
CH| 4.2.09 @ 2:28PM
Give me a break, this girl would never go full-term; it would mess up her 'figure'. Abortions at 8 weeks are the only way to go for her. That way, she can keep her flat tummy. Pig.
Bill| 4.2.09 @ 2:53PM
Um, being libertarianish doesn't mean selfish bitches are invisible. So, I see them. Not to mention the moaning about how puritanical is, is beyond lame. They write for frigging Jezebel.
Vicki| 4.2.09 @ 3:17PM
Uh, abortion's legal. If this is how they view motherhood, why would they go that route when they have other gloriously independent options that won't tie them down to a harried middle-class lifestyle.
Seriously, if you're going to go ahead and have the baby surely you can muster a modicum of decency and restraint. And I also have to say that I thought the belly was fake at first. That is one weird-looking baby bump.
tanksoldier| 4.2.09 @ 5:41PM
While I can't comment on the cultural viewpoint in France I can say that in the US the sheer absurdity of the photos delivers the opposite message from what was probably intended.
Here in the US viewers would mostly be saying "Well of _course_ you don't smoke around a baby or handle your infant like Britney Spears; silly French people!"
HeatherRadish| 4.2.09 @ 7:14PM
There's no "tenderness" anywhere in that shoot. I feel sorry for those folks at Jezebel who think those images represent maternal love, because clearly they've missed out on one of the good things in life.
They may have a point about the "cult of motherhood in this country", albeit accidentally: there is huge overemphasis in the popular media on celebrity pregnancies and babies, and it's ridiculous and destructive, because they're not *celebrating motherhood*--the bellies and babies are fashion accessories, raised by staff and only brought out for photoshoots between parties. Certainly they're not advocating home-making, or family life.
Bill| 4.2.09 @ 7:33PM
Looks like "Change" to me.
Mary| 4.2.09 @ 8:13PM
This is perfect representational art.
The androgony -especially in the first photo- hits you right away.
Extended adolescence and arrested development jump right out too.
Bridgette Bardot had a 21 inch waist. These women are men are women are men. It doesn't matter. Keep the baby, pay someone to triturate in utero, it doesn't matter.
I wonder though, if this anti-type eventually gives rise to a longing -unnamed and inarticulate at first- for permanent things.
If I were a fashion designer right now, I'd bring back straight skirts, just below the knee, fitted, cropped sweaters and my models would be very curvy.
For men, I'd bring back suits with jackets that fall just an inch or two below the backside. I'd bring back a real straight-leg pant too. And my models would be naturally muscular. No weight lifting, at all.
Wm| 4.2.09 @ 9:33PM
As a photographer, all I see in this image is "posturing." It's a cheap and transparent attempt to engender outrage, to provoke a reaction. Childish, really: It's the kind of thing children to do get attention, no more.
A long time ago this might have been outrageous, but these days it's been so overdone that it's just boring. Nothing more, just boring. The photographer should have been sent way, told to come up with something new and original, not this tired crap.
tanna| 4.3.09 @ 2:21AM
Wm, I was about to post my thoughts, "Trying too hard." before I saw yours.
Not only do we share the same disdain for posers, I'm pretty sure we both yawned.
It looks like the work of a college sophomore in a 101 class.
CH| 4.3.09 @ 2:40AM
Hobag chic/Heroin chic. So yesterday.
Ruth| 4.3.09 @ 3:08AM
I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Ruth
http://ramupgrade.info
Catherine| 4.3.09 @ 3:17AM
This is a metaphor for the decline of the indigenous European.
In 50 years, you won't see photos like this in France anymore. Eurabia.
Carol| 4.3.09 @ 8:11AM
I'm a lifelong conservative, if you don't count my side trip to liberterianism that ended on 9-11.
It's fashion photography. That means it's silly and narcissistic and meant to show off clothes, and of course the screaming talent of the photographer, which personally, I don't see. I don't even like the clothes it's supposed to be making me look at. If I saw the whole spread in the magazine, if I thought anything, I would think that yet again, someone thinks he's being oh so clever and transgressive. I would not think of it as a morality play.
Cranky| 4.3.09 @ 10:13AM
I'm not entirely sure what they're going for here. It's supposed to be an edgy editorial shoot, but what exactly are they editorializing? Are they making fun of bad mothers or shooting for that "good art is shocking" angle?
When I look at this, I see an otherwise pretty girl made up to look skanky whilst wearing some f-ugly clothes. My first reaction was a "something stinks" face and a quiet "ugh," but then I come from a school of thought that says art's purpose is to edify, to lift up, the human spirit rather than shock or denigrate it.
Roxeanne de Luca| 4.3.09 @ 1:17PM
Why can't all these so-called feminists at Jezebel and Feministe criticise the obvious issue here: that this lady has never been pregnant, and, if she were, wouldn't have that perfect, stick-thin model figure with only a baby bump? Obviously, they would never use an actual pregnant woman for a pregnant-woman photo shoot: women who are pregnant just aren't sexy enough.
Feminist rant aside, what about human dignity? The unseen person in all this who is harmed is the baby (aka foetus). As much as we are supposed to focus on the model, we are aware of an invisible, silent victim in this behaviour.
If this is a Rorschach test, I don't know what it says about me, other than: conservative because the classical liberal ideals of human rights and human dignity for all are the province of the right-wingers, not the liberals.
RedRed Rice| 4.3.09 @ 2:08PM
What do I see here? A cheap knock-off of a John Waters movie. Divine did it better. So-called progressives haven't progressed much, but they're definitely into recycling.
Pingback| 4.3.09 @ 7:23PM
When you see a picture of Snoopy flying his Sopwith Camel, do you see a heartless war links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.4.09 @ 3:45AM
Weekend: What do you see when you look at these pictures? « Jim Blazsik links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.7.09 @ 3:07PM
. » ugh. links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
ammar| 4.22.09 @ 1:10AM
hahaha
http://www.ar-sh.com
350-030| 4.25.10 @ 10:09PM
High quality Cisco, HP, IBM, Oracle and other Certification exmas training materials are provided here at Pass4sure Pass4sure helps you on your way to your certifications,Click 350-030 to get more information!