misappropriation of outrage
Jan. 24th, 2007 04:35 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sophiaserpentiaTwo different news items which on the surface couldn't seem less connected, and yet i saw a similar thing going on in both.
::struggles to stop laughing long enough to write again::
Where to start, where to start... okay, first of all, the ad won't give people the impression that working in a restaurant is demeaning and unpleasant. Working in a restaurant gives you the impression that it is demeaning and unpleasant. Oh, you mean the execs enjoy it just fine? Some of them probably even "got their hands dirty" flipping burgers during a summer or two, in between terms at their Ivy League college. They have fond memories from that wild and carefree time of their life.
But here's what gets me about the first part of their statement. People who work in restaurants aren't going to be offended by the ad. THEY'RE they ones who are offended. But they'll expose themselves as the whiny self-righteous jerks they are if they don't make it sound like they're sticking up for the poor exploited underdogs (you know, the underdogs they employ whom they're hoping won't get a minimum wage boost this year).
And now the second story, considerably less funny.
::not laughing this time::
Do you see the parallels here? Again, we have a group claiming to speak on behalf of the oppressed -- in this case, survivors of childhood rape -- when they are really only attempting to further their own agenda. In fact, they are claiming to speak up on behalf of abuse survivors while at the same time trying to silence them. How perverse is that?
Secondly, last time i saw any legal definition of pornography, it involved the word "prurient." I don't find rape scenes to have anything to do with prurience -- do you?
Lastly, it's obvious that Baehr did not even ask Dakota Fanning for her thoughts on whether or not she was uncomfortable about the whole thing. Here's what she had to say about it:
A restaurant trade group says it is insulted by an insurance company's planned Super Bowl ad that stars Kevin Federline as a fast-food worker. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co.'s 30-second spot shows Federline... performing in a glitzy music video. However, the punch line is that he's daydreaming — while cooking french fries at a fast-food joint.
The ad amounts to a "strong and direct insult to the 12.8 million Americans who work in the restaurant industry," wrote National Restaurant Association President and Chief Executive Steven Anderson in a letter to Nationwide CEO Jerry Jurgensen.
The commercial "would give the impression that working in a restaurant is demeaning and unpleasant," Anderson wrote.
from Restaurant group objects to K-Fed ad
::struggles to stop laughing long enough to write again::
Where to start, where to start... okay, first of all, the ad won't give people the impression that working in a restaurant is demeaning and unpleasant. Working in a restaurant gives you the impression that it is demeaning and unpleasant. Oh, you mean the execs enjoy it just fine? Some of them probably even "got their hands dirty" flipping burgers during a summer or two, in between terms at their Ivy League college. They have fond memories from that wild and carefree time of their life.
But here's what gets me about the first part of their statement. People who work in restaurants aren't going to be offended by the ad. THEY'RE they ones who are offended. But they'll expose themselves as the whiny self-righteous jerks they are if they don't make it sound like they're sticking up for the poor exploited underdogs (you know, the underdogs they employ whom they're hoping won't get a minimum wage boost this year).
And now the second story, considerably less funny.
"Hounddog" is the story of Lewellen, a girl played by 12-year-old Dakota Fanning, who is growing up in the 1960s South. ...
The disturbing scene lasts a few minutes but is not graphic. There is no nudity, the scene is very darkly lit and only Fanning's face and hand are shown. Kampmeier said it took her a decade to get the film made, largely because of the rape scene, but cutting it was a compromise she was unwilling to make.
"This issue is so silenced in our society. There are a lot of women who are alone with this story," she said.
... Ted Baehr, chairman of the Christian Film and Television Commission and publisher of the Web site movieguide.org, claims "Hounddog" breaks federal child-pornography law. He said the law covers material that "appears" to show minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct. "Even if they're not actually performing the explicit act, we are dealing with a legal issue here," he said.
Baehr said Fanning is being exploited in the film, and that it should be considered an outrage. "Children at 12 do not have the ability to make the types of decisions that we're talking about here," he said. "If we're offended by some comedian's racial slur, why aren't we offended by somebody taking advantage of a 12-year-old child?"
from Film's child rape scene causes stir
::not laughing this time::
Do you see the parallels here? Again, we have a group claiming to speak on behalf of the oppressed -- in this case, survivors of childhood rape -- when they are really only attempting to further their own agenda. In fact, they are claiming to speak up on behalf of abuse survivors while at the same time trying to silence them. How perverse is that?
Secondly, last time i saw any legal definition of pornography, it involved the word "prurient." I don't find rape scenes to have anything to do with prurience -- do you?
Lastly, it's obvious that Baehr did not even ask Dakota Fanning for her thoughts on whether or not she was uncomfortable about the whole thing. Here's what she had to say about it:
Fanning said she and Kampmeier talked for months before the film was shot and spent a day painting pottery together and discussing the story.
"It's not really happening," Fanning said of a rape. "It's a movie, and it's called acting. I'm not going through anything. Cody and Isabelle aren't going through anything, their characters are.
"And for me, when it's done it's done," she said. "I don't even think about it anymore."
