Millie Paine: let's stop celebrating perfection

For anyone who brands themself a feminist (including myself), the latest controversy surrounding Kim Kardashian is a minefield of conflicting views and arguments and is part of a long-running debate surrounding the objectification of women in the media. Putting our knee-jerk reactions to Kim’s stark-naked, oil-covered body aside, it’s important to really consider what it is that we are reacting to so strongly. Female sexuality is always a double-edged sword: on the one hand, we could see the celebrity as a woman embracing her sexuality and displaying her body with pride. Or conversely, it is arguably perpetuating a culture where women are seen only as sexual beings, willingly using their bodies as objects for male gratification in order to gain fame and publicity. Personally, I think it’s the latter.

Heavily doctored and airbrushed pictures have long been the norm and, even with some prominent celebrities speaking out against the practice, the covers of fashion and beauty magazines continue to be graced by images of unattainable and unrealistic perfection. This latest example in the form of Kim Kardashian’s photo shoot is no exception, and here we see the normal contours and features of her body being altered to the point of exaggeration for the purposes of hyper-sexualisation of the female form. Rumours about her specific plastic surgery aside, the amount of photoshop that her photos have undergone paints an entirely unnatural image of the female body, to the extent where even her areolae have been drastically minimised. And that, I feel, is what is so damaging about these kinds of photo shoots – they aren’t interested in baring a woman’s body to reveal all her perfections and imperfections – it is about revealing a highly-doctored version of the female body and passing it off as real.

There is nothing wrong with a woman sexualising herself. After all, men sexualise women all the time. What is so damaging is the fact that this sexualisation is done for the purpose of making money and selling an image of oneself, an image that other women will try (and fail) to emulate. Kim Kardashian’s fame is part of a wider culture of celebrating someone simply for being famous, and she is just one in a long line of such figures, which includes figures such as Paris Hilton, the original ‘it’ girl, and Nicole ‘Snooki’ Polizzi. Nothing about these women’s personalities, values or talents is ever shared with the public – we are not interested in their opinions or how they think. It is all about how the look, what they wear and where they wear it. This perpetuates the belief that a woman’s value rests solely in her body and her sex appeal, which further sets back the age-old fight women face in order to be seen as something other than objects of desire. These celebrity figures are worth millions, and are clearly enterprising and savvy. Why, then, is someone like Kim Kardashian presenting herself as nothing more than a giant arse and pair of surgically engineered breasts?

Worse still is the enormous popularity and attention such celebrity figures receive, making them prominent role models for young and impressionable girls. If a young girl’s favourite reality TV star uses her body to make money, then what kind of message does this send out? With so much media attention being given to women like this, we entirely overlook some of the amazing things done by talented public figures such as Angelina Jolie and Emma Watson (or spend more time analysing their outfits than the words coming out of their mouths). These are accomplished, talented, strong and principled women ready to stand up for what they believe in. These are the types of women that should be role models for young girls. 

Don’t get me wrong, once you’re a consenting adult, you can do what you want with your body. if that means posing completely nude like Kim Kardashian, then that’s your prerogative. But the attention these media stunts garner isn’t always positive, as a look at the abuse Kim Kardashian has received on social media sites will prove. The reaction to her photos on social media has been disgusting, and is the result of a sexist society which demands female nudity and yet is seemingly repulsed when this demand is met. 

It’s not the nudity that I dislike. Far from it – a celebration of female anatomy is empowering. But what I don’t agree with is the agenda behind these media campaigns – the presentation of unrealistic and distorted examples of the female form. This isn’t about celebrating beauty, it’s about making headlines and making money. It would be refreshing to see prominent figures like Kim Kardashian recognising their positions of influence within the media and using these positions responsibly.

__________________________________________________________________________

Amy Clark: nudity, body image and racism

When Paper Magazine released their newest issue featuring photos of Kim Kardashian partially naked, and later followed it up with full frontal nude pictures, the reactions were varied and polarising. The magazine’s idea behind the photos was to ‘break the internet’, and whilst this clearly didn’t happen, it did result in both a lot of backlash across the web, and much discussion regarding society’s aversion to female sexuality and some of the potential problems with John-Paul Goude’s photo shoot. Both the photoshoot itself and the wide-ranging reactions to it give us a basis from which to explore some of the problematic issues surrounding gender and racial inequality in the media.

One of the most oft-repeated criticisms of Kim Kardashian’s choice to pose naked is based on the fact that she is now a mother. Embedded within these responses is the idea that a woman must fit within certain ‘proper’ norms in order to be classified as a good and respectable mother by society. This assumes that setting a good example for her child must mean staying fully clothed and rejecting the celebration of her body. Inherent within this attack on Kim as a mother is the belief that women who have children no longer have any right to explore their own sexuality or to feel sexy, something that has been reiterated again and again with other female celebrities who act in a way perceived to be too provocative and are then slammed for their choices. It is assumed, wrongly, that being a mother and being sexy are two mutually exclusive states of being. 

It would be gratifying to think that this is the same for men – that becoming a father immediately means that a man cannot pose naked or view himself as a sexual figure – but clearly this is not the case. Women shouldn't be vilified for being a mothers and also choosing to celebrate their bodies by posing nude, or in a manner deemed provocative by society, because to do so is to perpetuate the attitude that it’s okay for the public to police a woman’s body and shame her for revealing it. The backlash Kim has suffered as a result of her photo shoot serves to illustrate many of the underlying problems of inequality between men and women still prevalent in society today concerning body confidence and sexuality.

Another common argument against such photo shoots is that nudity is inappropriate and offensive to women, that, by posing naked, celebrities are undermining and disrespecting the rights of women. To criticise women in this manner is to perpetuate a sexist and paternalistic viewpoint and it supports the assumption that equal rights only apply to women who conform to certain behavioural norms. It is interesting, too, to see what reactions to these photo shoots reveal about societal attitudes to body shape and weight. When Kiera Knightly released a topless photo without any digital enhancements, she was applauded for her bravery. Her nude picture was automatically deemed acceptable because her body type conforms to society’s ideals about the female form. It isn’t shocking for Knightley’s photo to be ‘natural’, because, according to the media’s standards, there is no need for enhancements – her ‘natural’ beauty is celebrated. Whereas, with a body shape like that of Kardashian, enhancement is a must, because we are still in a place where true body shape and size is something to be feared rather than accepted. 

In this way, nude photo shoots may, admittedly, play into the sexism surrounding women’s bodies and further perpetuate the negative and damaging image that the media and individuals have about what constitutes the optimal body type for women. Taking Kim Kardashian’s photo shoot as the most recent example, many commentators have also pointed out the underlying racist and misogynistic elements to be found in the photos. Throughout history, there have been countless examples of the objectification of women, in particular women of colour, highlighting their exoticism for a normative western audience. The photographer of Kim’s photo shoot, John-Paul Gaude, falls into a category of men who see these physical characteristics as something to be objectified and fetishised. Kim Kardashian’s photo shoot was a remake of one of Gaude’s earlier ones and, like the one before it, it follows a model of countless years of exploitation of black women, playing up their ‘exotic’ ethnicity and almost caricaturing them in the process.  

While these problematic elements are not necessarily the fault of the women being photographed – with the photographers, media, and even society itself bearing some of the responsibility – I can fully appreciate how these kinds of photo shoots serve to perpetuate years of stereotype and unrealistic expectations about the female body through the extreme alteration and exaggeration of physical features and the racist undertones to be found in some artistic decisions. Rather than being disgusted with the act of a woman posing nude, it would be much more beneficial for women, and for society as a whole, if we identified and addressed these real problems concerning gender and race, rather than writing vitriol about a woman’s choice to appear in the nude.