Faithbook

Britney Wants Something More?

I see London I see France…
“This rayon bikini is not underpants!”

While none of us would ever consider walking around in public in underwear, the woman’s bikini –one bar bra, the other panty –merely has to contain some Spandex and Rayon within its weave for it to be suddenly considered appropriate for public wearing. What is it about that puny, stretchy fabric that allows women to declare themselves liberated from clothes, while the same amount of coverage from their Hanes too over exposing?

We live in a world where a single mother dancing around in her underwear for money is front page news. I’ve seen the story of Britney Spears’ VMA performance a dozen times today from various media outlets, who have unanimously decided that her performance left much to be desired. In the clip, Ms. Spears appears lifeless, trying so desperately to look sexy that she ends up looking pathetic. She is the mother of two young babies, presumably in the care of nannies or her ex-husband as she halfheartedly gyrated for millions. Did we do this to her?

Pop culture –sold to us on TV, in music, in stores and online –wants our generation to believe that we are entitled to indulgence at every bend, and that no behavior can be deemed as inappropriate. Stripping, once relegated to the dank corners of society because it demeans the dignity of both the performer and the consumer, is now broadcast as business as usual. But Spears’ mood and performance belied the tragedy of exploitation all too well.

How could our culture decide that enough is enough? Well, for starters, read this article entitled How The Bad Girl Became Good. And take a look at Wendy Shalit’s new book, whose title, Girls Gone Mild, does not sufficiently express the power of modesty. The Pink Nun proves that modesty can be, of all things, a wee bit naughty. Yes, Sr. Purity insists that it’s never too late, even for those of us who have been a bit bad. Did you hear that, Ms. Spears?

By Elizabeth Tenety  |  September 11, 2007; 10:13 AM ET  | Category:  Campus Catholic
Share: Email a Friend | Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Thoughts Are Free | Next: My Field Trip to Church

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



heaven help us-who is giving these children these jobs here?

does anyone really feel the tiniest bit edified being preached at by a teenager?

if i want britney spears ill read some pulp at the newstand- i come here to get away from this sensationalist garbage.

sorry temder youngster- but not many of us are going to read books with "girl" in the title

while it may be life altering for you, were adults and have pretty much already been there

come back in 10 years maybe

Posted by: VICTORIA | September 21, 2007 2:07 AM
Report Offensive Comment

"As an atheist, I'll never understand this strange aversion to freedom of sexuality."

And as long as atheists describe the commodification of sexuality as an irreducible component of atheism, responsible supporters of the family will have to oppose them and atheism generally.

Commodification of sexuality is wrong because sexual behaviour is by definition inseparable from its biological basis in reproduction. Commodification of the sexual act inevitably results in the commodification of the participants, first any resulting children (who will come to be regarded as inconvenient byproducts of the transaction), and then of the participants themselves, first of each other, then of themselves.

Posted by: mulopwepaul | September 12, 2007 5:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Not worried about the flesh factor here (indeed, as a male, I am fine with it...yet somehow couldn't find it in me to be "titillated" by Brit at the VMA's. Wonder why). My concern is that this skin as entertainment thing is nothing more than bad crappity crap crap. Bad art (or lack of art) will kill you way before Brit's overstuffed tramp routine.

Posted by: brandonesque@yahoo.com | September 12, 2007 11:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment

How can you make a statement on someone else's dignity? Who are you to decide that a stripper is degrading her or himself, or that the strip club patron is lesser for his or her choice of entertainment? Why can't we enjoy each other's bodies in a consensual manner? As an atheist, I'll never understand this strange aversion to freedom of sexuality.

This Wendy Shalit seems to be a true anti-feminist, believing that there are inherent differences between men and women that need to be adhered to, such as that adolescent males are the only horny people in the world. She's perpetuating that idea that girls who have sex are sluts, but boys who do the same are just being themselves (The article and her book both only mention girls in the title, because girls must control their urges!). Of course, let's not subscribe to an individualistic perspective, because that's just not God's way. This woman objected to co-ed bathrooms? Because we should all fear the genitalia of the opposite sex? Who even sees other people's naughty bits in the toilet?

One is entitled to his or her personal beliefs regarding modesty, but to judge other people for their different beliefs is disgusting.

Also, Britney Spears' issue wasn't trying too hard to look sexy - it was being (most likely) high, nervous, and out of practice. In case you weren't aware, she had been doing sexy really well for years without a hitch.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2007 6:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2009 The Washington Post Company