Well, she does have nice breasts. Perhaps she’s right?
So that means Sydney Sweeney is also tearing other women down and offering superficial support?
Take a field where people are in competition with one another and where people’s physique are one of the main things they get judged on and is it really a surprise that empowering other people isn’t a priority to the members of that community?
Baum went on to call Sweeney and Glen Powell’s smash-hit rom-com Anyone But You an “unwatchable movie,” before revealing that she asked her students to “explain” the actress to her. "I said to my class, ‘Explain this girl to me. She’s not pretty, she can’t act. Why is she so hot?’ Nobody had an answer,” she said,
Yeah, seems like she had cause to say “maybe we don’t have to hate each other for having success”…
The Baum in question.
I honestly ignored that Sweeney is a perfectly good looking woman because the whole premise is stupid.
The whole point of acting is to be whatever character. If people like one character enough, it doesn’t matter how “good” your acting is. All that matters is that people connected to that character.
But also women bashing women for how attractive they are is definitely shit.
There are many feminists who like blaming men for stuff. Men sexualise women, only see them as objects, don’t respect them, and so on. But when you look at women’s magazines, many articles written by women themselves, they tear each other down the entire time. “Look at what she wore to the gala! How ugly!”, “Big faux pas by FAMOUS ACTRESS!”, “FAMOUS ACTRESS really shouldn’t go outside looking like this”, and so on. And other women absolutely love. It’s all some can gossip about. And somehow that get turns around to “the patriarchy” and in turn “men are to blame”.
You read that shit? I’ve never been into it myself, but some people love gossip rags. Calling them women’s magazines is the insult, they’re lowest common denominator garbage. Like the daily mail. Equating them to all women is like saying all men are Andrew Tate fans.
“The patriarchy” is not code for men, just fyi. Women policing other women’s clothing and appearance fits into the patriarchy, because it’s a reinforcement that women’s only value is based on their sex appeal.
Oh of course not. It’s just the system created by, controlled by, and made for men as a way to oppress women by equating their value to sex appeal. Who would ever think of implying patriarchy = men. Why would anybody get that idea?
Except the patriarchy isn’t made/controlled/for men exclusively. It’s upheld by both men and women. Some women are benefactors of the patriarchy, just as some men are victims.
It’s a way to oppress everyone, by reducing women to mothers and sex objects and reducing men to laborers and cannon fodder. Women are too emotional and men aren’t allowed to show emotion without being pussies. It’s a double edged sword.
It’s a way to oppress everyone
Ask yourself who benefits from this and you might find out it’s not a “patriarchy”.
Nobody really benefits as a demographic as a whole. It leads to mens higher suicide rates, prevents women from fully realizing their potential, and precludes the existence of NB people. Individuals benefit in various ways, for example: men receive higher pay and women receive more emotional support. I (AFAB) “benefit” from women’s parking spots that exist because of rape culture, but is that really a win?
There’s really no section of the population that benefits from infighting between the sexes? No section that benefits by distracting large parts of the population by having them focus on their perceived differences? No group that can afford to influence the narrative, conditions, and perceptions to their benefit? No group comes to mind?
Why don’t you just tell me what you think instead of making me guess.
