John Darcey Darcey 1 Professor GarberHm 46March 5thBuns of Steel and Sex AppealIt seems in the past decade more and more attention has been put on firm buttocks and thighs on women. Susan J. Douglas wrote an article called ? Flex Appeal, Buns of Steel, and the Body in Question?.
It addresses this fad in a woman’s point of view. Douglas, who was a teacher and free lance writer has had many of her article appear in The Village Voice. It seems from the tone of this article that Douglas is disgusted by the emphasis put on the female body and has probably had struggles with weight herself, as many women these days have had. Douglas points out in her article all of the publicity that has been put on women’s hindquarters. It seems like everywhere you go you can catch a glimpse of a woman’s tight rear end or firm thighs.
On billboards, magazine covers, articles, television, just about anywhere you can put a butt you will see one. Douglas says ? ?not just in Vogue or Cosmo, either: even in the Village Voice,? has ads for products such as the videotape called Buns of Steel. ? (Douglas 181) There is also an enormity of exercise videos making claims like ? Now you can have the Buns you always wanted?. The author also points out two ads that Darcey 2show perfect bottoms with slogans like ? You’ve worked hard? and ?If you work it shows?.
(Douglas 182) Douglas seems offended by this rebutting ?meaning if you have been slacking off, that will show too?. (Douglas 182) I personally think that if it were actually that easy, we would all have ?buns of steel?. Douglas brings up something that most of us have never thought of before. She seems to think that expected woman to have tight behinds is trying to make them more like men.
She claims that this is a ?distortion of feminism? (Douglas 182) She then goes onto say ? ?that ambitious women want, or should want, to be just like men, especially those men committed to the most competitive, inhumane, macho aspects of patriarchy. I don’t really see the connection, being that I am sure woman like firm buns on men too. It seems that Douglas is ashamed of her own body as you can see in the statement ?They insist that the rest of us should feel only one thing when we put on a bathing suit: profound mortification. ? (Douglas 181) I don’t think that any women should feel ashamed of her body in a bathing suit or anything else for that matter. Douglas explains how women naturally have more fat than men do, in order to carry babies. This is another reason she came to the theory of the public wanting women to be more like men.
She also make a sarcastic statement ?A real women, of any Darcey 3age, will get off her butt and, by overcoming her sloth, not just get in shape, but conquer genetics and history. ? (Douglas 182)According to the article this buttock and thigh craze started in the eighties. It seems, according to Douglas, that the popularity of thighs and buttocks much overrode the popularity of breast. The reason, she explains, it that even flat – chested women can have a goal of ?buns of steel?.
I feel that part of this is that sexual – oriented matters where becoming more public on television in ads. It was probably the first decade that it was acceptable to blatantly display women’s rear – ends. When all of the regular women saw this, and how the media connected it to sexuality and wealthiness it became a craze. In addition to that men came to think that is what to expect from a women, and therefore put more pressure on their own girlfriends and wives to look like the models.
Douglas says ?The key to huge profits was to emphasize beauty over health, sexuality over fitness, and to equate thin thighs with wealth and status?. (Douglas 182) Douglas says this is Reaganism, which means that appearances are just as important as character. Another controversy of this topic is that all these ads show a nice figure as a sign of discipline. The author seems upset with this, because women with desk jobs that Darcey 4work harder than the one who happen to have the time that work out all the time, are considered lazy because of there appearance.
The author also seems to disagree with the word cellulite, saying that a women who has it will be ?dismissed as slothful and lacking moral fiber? (Douglas 182) Who question seems to be, what does a tight butt say about the women and her character. She believes, and I tend to agree, nothing at all. She states in her article ?Females buns of steel mark a woman as a desirable piece of ass, yet someone who can actually kick ass when necessary?. (Douglas 183) In this statement she in insinuated that a strong but doesn’t actually add to physical strength. The actual point of Douglas’ article seems to be that so much emphasis should not be put on tight buns, and more on the accomplishments of the women.
Personally, I have known many girls that were so consumed with their weight and the size of their butt it became an obsession. I think Douglas is right about the media and the influence, but I also feel she is reading to much into the matter. Physical attractiveness whether it is buttocks, breast, thighs or legs will always be around for men or for women. I think the general public just has to remember that the women you see on TV are one in a million and it can not be expected for all of them to look like that.
Darcey 5Works CitedDoouglas, Susan J. ?Flex Appeal, Buns of Steel, and the Body in Question?. Complements. Anna Katsavos ; Elizabeth Wheeler, McGrw – Hill inc.
Paris, 1930
