Showing posts with label shit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label shit. Show all posts

Thursday, May 4, 2017

A twat by any other name


The World Needs a Vagina Museum

One woman in London is dedicated to starting the world’s first physical space wholly dedicated to vaginas.

APRIL 28, 2017




Florence Schechter is the sort of person who gets a good idea, starts a project, and sees if it its sticks. “I like just going for things and seeing if they work,” she says. “I get upset if I’ve got a good idea and I can’t actually put it into action.” This outlook is what led her, after realizing that the world lacks a museum dedicated to vaginas, to start planning to rectify that omission.





There is a chain of events that led to this particular good idea. Schechter studied biochemistry but realized she likes talking about science more than doing science. After college, she started a YouTube channel so she could keep talking about science. (She also has started a science film company, Collab Lab, and does science-themed stand-up comedy.) One of her videos is about animal penises—she’s interested in mating behavior in the animal world—and as a follow-up she wanted to make one about vaginas.






BLOGGER'S COMMENTS. OK, OK - I get her idea. Too many penises; not enough vaginas. But this "museum" of hers displays all kinds of floral images, which are meant - I would guess - to give a sense of a woman's external genitalia.

In other words - her vulva.

Vulva, people!

I've written about this before: how the word vagina, once never uttered by anyone, is now proclaimed at every opportunity to refer to anything below a woman's waist.

The synonym for "vagina" is "birth canal". It's a tube. It's nothing that sticks out or is visible. At all. The vagina is invisible! No one can see it but your gynecologist (and only when the speculum is in there and cranked wide open). Why then is it being used to describe the most erotic part of a woman's anatomy?

For just that reason: it's too erotic. Vagina has a nice clean, clinical sound to it. (Ugly, if you ask me, reminding me of Regina and Spadina and Carolina). Vulva is just too - I don't know! It's sort of - ugh! It's - it's just too -

Too sexual.




It's a voluptuous sort of word (ewwwwww!) that folds into itself, actually a kind of visual onomatopoeia (and I can't believe I actually used that word). Say it over and over again.

Oh all right then, don't.

The point I'm trying to make is that society has become pretty casual about displaying a man's "junk" and making lots of jokes about it.  But when it comes to the humble vulva, we pretend it doesn't even exist.

We just don't display what's "down there". Who has a vulva, anyway? And for God's sake, let's not get into the clitoris, a word which is mispronounced 95% of the time. I once heard a university professor go on and on about the "cli-Taurus". Nobody corrected him because they all thought he was right.




As far as I am concerned, women's sexuality has been shoved back into the closet. I remember all sorts of stuff coming out in the '70s about consciousness-raising, women comparing genitals to learn the lesson that "everything is natural and normal and beautiful" in a woman's body.

Now none of it is, and everyone is abnormal.

Meantime, in 2017, a record number of women are undergoing a mutilating, utterly barbaric procedure called labiaplasty (labia being another word we never hear, because all that "stuff" down there is called vagina, folks. VAGINA!). This means the labia are cut off and sewn up so, basically, the woman ends up with a cute little pre-pubescent slit with nothing protruding at all. This sexless mound is usually kept neatly shaven because, well, it just looks better that way. Looks better for him, I would assume.

Why is this happening? Why is it acceptable, increasingly popular and even desirable, to undergo this modern-day version of female circumcision? I don't watch porn, but I have been informed that this is the way a lot of female porn stars look. God knows what they have done to themselves to achieve that look (probably labiaplasty!), but it is fast becoming the "norm", making sexually-intact women feel dirty, smelly and messy "down there" (the vagina, I mean).




I suppose boy friends, husbands and lovers will eventually come around to that standard naked slit, rejecting any woman who does not resemble an eight-year-old girl. Men watch a lot of porn now, and have come to assume those images reflect reality. If that's all a guy has ever seen, well - . Victorian men used to run to throw up on their wedding night, realizing to their horror that their wives had pubic hair.

What creeps me out - well, the whole thing does. I'd rather cut my ears off so my head will look neater. But the fact that it renders the vulva pre-pubescent in appearance is simply alarming. It's eroticizing childish-looking genitals. I don't know how else to see it.

But it gets worse.

I Couldn't Poop For 5 Days While On Vacation With My New Boyfriend

It seems when you’re in the midst of that “Everything is perfect, I’m perfect, you’re perfect” stage of a relationship, nobody poops.


When I returned home from a two-week European vacation with my (fairly) new beau, after the tales of our journey from London to Paris, the revelation that pigeon tastes actually not that bad, and the admittance that, oui, Paris women really are the most stylish femmes on the planet, my girlfriend, Lauren, asked me:

“OK, but you have to tell me: How did you… poo?”






Just so you know Lauren’s not into poo, or anything. I mean, I think she composts, but she’s not into scatology or those DIY fecal transplants. The reason for her inquiry into my bowel movements was in regard to a common problem that plagues many women in new relationships.

“A lot of women actually get sick during the first six weeks of the relationship because they don’t poo around their partner,” Lauren told me matter-of-factly, as if she had actually researched that 
sh**.






Now, for the life of Google, I could not verify her claim for the sake of this article, but I did find various blog posts and forums where various women commented that pooping is forbidden when it comes to dating. It seems when you’re in the midst of that “Everything is perfect, I’m perfect, you’re perfect” stage of a relationship, nobody poops. Or, at least, you don’t want to imagine that the area you want to do dirty things to is, well, dirrrrtttty.






OK, here it is again, the imperative to NOT be a normal, natural, functioning human being. I had never heard of this pressure on females (no one ever mentions this problem in connection with males) to suppress their bowel movements when they're in a new relationship.

But now I have become enlightened. Girls don't poop, they just don't, and if they DO they are dirrrrrttttty and animalistic, if not a downright freak.
Or, at least, unattractive. Or, at very least, downright inconsiderate to their normally-pooping boyfriends. How can they even think of doing such a disgusting thing in the same hotel room?

I groaned when I came across this piece, but was flabbergasted to see dozens and dozens of articles and message boards and social media posts about "whether we should poop when we're with our boy friends". This is an actual question that you see. A lot. Incredibly, an example was cited of a seven-year marriage where the wife had always found a way to poop outside the home, in a public bathroom somewhere, or at least in a bathroom in a remote, faraway part of the house (with the fan on, and the water running). Or maybe she had a port-a-potty out in the back yard. Thus, her husband had actually come to believe that she never pooped.




It's hard enough not to have genitals, or to have genitals that can only be called by one (inaccurate) name, or genitals that can only be portrayed by pictures of flowers and fruit (or sliced off and sewn up into a neat little slit). It's much worse to be forbidden a bodily function which is about as crucial to health as eating (and by the way, women face pretty tough strictures on that too). The story I quoted above concludes with the woman's shame-faced admission that she had become hellishly constipated after two weeks of not pooping. But isn't dealing with rock-hard shit a lot better than having him leave you because you. . . poop?

This is what I worry about. These things become standardized, after a while. Holding it in will become a requirement, something all decent women are expected to do so their boyfriends won't be totally disgusted and grossed out.





I remember reading someone's query to a sort of internet Dear Abby dating expert, and it was on this question: when my boyfriend of three years sleeps over at my apartment for the weekend, should I - you know? Can I - I mean, is it OK if I - sort of - I mean, uh - can I use my bathroom? The Dear Abby person was sort of taken aback. This woman was asking a dating expert if she could use HER OWN BATHROOM for a universal bodily function. The underlying feeling is that if he finds out she actually shits, he'll just (pardon the expression) dump her.

Who knows how true this is? Maybe a lot of guys DO insist a woman never poop when they're in the same building (if ever). Maybe a lot of guys DO want a neat little slit in which to deposit their goopy, disgusting, fish-smelling slime.

And women always fall into lockstep. If they don't, they might not get ANYBODY. The fact that this may even be true makes my head truly spin, if not fall right off.


Saturday, June 8, 2013

GO! (or: come back, Mr. Whipple - wherever you are)




(Note. I've dealt with this issue before in a previous post, but every time I see a new Charmin ad I have to update this due to their absolute genius for presenting their product in the most astonishingly offensive manner possible. And yet, the ads just go on and on. And so must I. . .)

When I first saw one of those Charmin ads - you know, the ones with the cutesie cartoon bears running behind trees to take a royal dump - I was pretty offended, but I managed to more-or-less tune it out. 

But then they escalated.





The Mama and Papa bear seemed highly concerned with Junior's wastefulness in the TP department, but the nice Charmin voiceover convinced them that with their brand, you could "use less". At the same time, Junior developed a problem: "Little bits left behind," requiring regular rectal inspection from Mama.

Little bits of what? I had to ask myself. And if it was toilet paper, why were they sticking? It didn't "bear" thinking about.

But then I noticed the annoying Baby Bear announcing at the end of the commercial, "We all go. Why not enjoy the go?"

Jesus Christ!




I wondered if I was the only person who was completely astonished by this bit of business. Characteristically, I went on an internet search and found so much shit I couldn't believe it.

Proctor and Gamble decided, in some bold and possibly idiotic move, to rip the inhibitions away from bathroom functions, to elevate urination and defecation to the lofty and even fun level they deserve. We should all be enjoying our basic bodily functions, not just getting them done so we can get on with our day. 

Interestingly enough, when I look up samples of Charmin ads on YouTube, ALL the comments are negative. NONE of them think the bears, including the shitty-assed Baby Bear, are cute. The newest ad is even more jaw-dropping: Charmin will, apparently, help you keep your underwear clean. (And this in full knowledge of the fact that these bears don't wear any clothes.)





I honestly don't know why this headspinningly offensive campaign is still on the air, but it just goes on and on, year after year, continually upping the ante, so to speak. One wonders what's next: actually watching the bears go grunt, grunt, plop? How much more explicit can these ads be?

(As an aside: why are there three colors of bear: red, blue and brown? Does the brown bear really get down to it, and will we soon be subjected to the fruits of his labours?)

Below I quote the only article I could find that deals with this embarrassing subject to any depth. But even this piece isn't complete. To kick off their cute new campaign, a few years ago Proctor and Gamble set up a sort of Defecation Expo with gigantic toilets and Disney-like washroom cubicles. Their public ambassadors, all fresh-faced and attractive, had to be people who "really, really enjoy going to the bathroom". One of their slogans was, and no, I am not making this up, "sit and squat".








The Wikipedia entry reads: 

Times Square Charmin restrooms 

In 2006, Charmin opened up public restrooms in New York City's Times Square. The location is now a new Disney Store. The convenience of having clean restrooms in Times Square during the Christmas season was a novel idea. There is currently no news of a 2013 Charmin restroom location at this time.

In case you can't quite make out the want ad above, some of the most unbelievable lines are:

"Do you enjoy going to the bathroom enough to earn $10,000.00? Charmin is conducting a national search to find five super-fun, enthusiastic people to work at the Charmin Restrooms in Times Square, NYC this holiday season. Description and Qualifications: Greet and entertain bathroom guests. Then, blog about the experience. All candidates must really, really enjoy going to the bathroom." And I can't go on, sorry.

I don't know, maybe it would be healthier for us if we DID sit around the water cooler comparing anecdotes about the quality and duration of our poo-poo experiences, ideally at lunch time. Maybe we should have little contests (judged by a rotating panel of poo monitors) to see who uses the least and most squares, and even a fragrance tester to determine whose dump smells best and worst. Might have something to do with what you ate last night. The curry, perhaps?




"Enjoy the Go"? Is Procter and Gamble's Campaign for Charmin a Bizarre Joke? (from BrandCulture Talk)


November 26, 2012 


Every once in a great while we encounter a campaign so execrable it defies belief. Charmin's "Enjoy the go" fits the bill and causes us to question whether the marketing geniuses at Procter and Gamble have lost their minds.





The campaign rhetorically asserts, "We all go. Why not enjoy the go?" Can this possibly be the Charmin brand assertion? Indeed it is. The brand embraces a path as grammatically desultory as the campaign is incomprehensible.

Here at BrandCulture Talk (with a hat tip to David Aaker) we spend a good deal of time discussing rationalemotional and self-expressive brand benefits.  Brands that lay claim only to functional benefits are subject to being quickly eclipsed by competitive offerings. Only by laying claim to emotional and self-expressive value can brands create enduring competitive advantage. Except for a product like toilet tissue.

We suffer no illusions as to the job Charmin is designed to perform. By seeking to elevate excretion and dejection to a source of pleasure, however, the campaign is at best puzzlingly risible (albeit in poor taste) and more likely, seriously unhinged. Charmin endeavors to explain, "We all go to the bathroom every day . . . especially after morning coffee. Talk about getting things going! . . . Whew, that curry was hot [steam whistle sound effect]! Bottom line, we all spend a lot of time going." We do?







How a company that is arguably the world's preeminent marketer of consumer packaged goods created, and continues to support this campaign is a mystery.  P&G has extended the campaign into social media (recent Tweet to Charmin's nearly 8,000 Twitter followers: "Anyone have a favorite game they play while 'enjoying the go?' We enjoy a certain mad avian galactic battle one"), a Facebook presence with over 325,000 "likes" (!) (recent post: "Did anyone have Charmin on their Black Friday shopping list????") and a dedicated blog that descends from the simply gross to a creepily voyeuristic "Daily peek inside the cleanest public restroom in Times Square" (although they may have rethought that one as the last "daily peek" took place in 2009). This campaign is so bad for so many reasons that the writers of Saturday Night Live would be hard-pressed to invent this madness as a parody.

And just to make this whole campaign a wee bit classier, let's add . . . Kim Kardashian a couple of "Enjoy the go" bear mascots, a Brooklyn drum corps and a ceremonial glass key to the toilet! See for yourself:








So . . . instead of furthering the devolution of the English language while mawkishly celebrating the unspeakable, wouldn't P&G be better served by dusting off an updated version of the venerable Mr. Whipple, who successfully hawked Charmin for over 20 years? Mr. Whipple cleverly extolled the functional (and actually valuable) benefit of softness through the inability for virtually anyone to resist the siren song of "squeezing the Charmin"? Like the iconic "Maytag Lonely Repairman," Mr. Whipple distinguished Charmin from competitive offerings with aplomb in more than 500 commercials, and was at one point the 3rd most recognizable American -- only behind Richard Nixon and Billy Graham. Not once did he feel compelled to mention enjoying the "go."





The late Dick Wilson, the actor who portrayed Mr. Whipple, hit upon the crux of Charmin's dilemma in a 1985 interview with the Chicago Tribune: 'What are you going to say about toilet paper? I think we handle it the best way we can." If only  P and G took his advice.









(An awful p. s., then I will truly stop. In what used to pass for morbid curiosity but is now seen as chirpy cheerleaderism, I decided to google terms which might be said to support the idea of "enjoy the go". What I came up with were terms for two psychiatric disorders: urophilia and coprophilia. This is the sort of stuff Dan Savage deals with in his ever-fascinating Savage Love column (not that I ever read it).

Sorry, folks, but this is what "enjoy the go" really means. Perhaps Proctor and Gamble had better do their homework more carefully next time.)