bodies

by

Are Men “Visual Creatures”?: A Discussion on Porn & Bioessentialism

TW//mentions of SA, porn addiction, objectification

One thing that really stood out to me in Throwing Like a Girl is how Iris Marion Young criticizes bioessentialism, which is the idea that men and women behave a certain way because it’s just “biology”. She shows how people explain things like throwing differences as natural, when they’re really learned through social expectations. It is similar to how people perform worse due to the stereotype threat, which is when minority groups tend to underperform on tests because they believe that they are not capable of performing well, leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

I think that same logic of “inherent” or “biological” behaviors can be applied to how men justify watching porn by saying “men are visual creatures”, which is not based in fact at all. That phrase is so harmful because it makes it seem like objectifying women is unavoidable, instead of something that men are choosing to participate in. 

Read more: Are Men “Visual Creatures”?: A Discussion on Porn & Bioessentialism

Porn is extremely dehumanizing because it turns people, often women, into objects meant to be looked at, not individuals with complex life experiences who have their own agency. Young talks about how women are taught to experience their bodies as something to be watched and judged, rather than as something they fully control. Porn takes that even further by reducing women to their body parts and presenting sex as something women exist to provide. It trains people to see women’s bodies as products rather than as a part of an intimate and sacred human interaction.

The idea that porn allows people to “buy” consent is disturbing on its own as well. Consent in porn is always available and detached from real emotional or physical consequences. Sometimes consent can even be depicted as NOT freely given, and disrespected, as part of r*pe fetishes. Humans were never meant to have instant and unlimited access to sex like this, and pretending that it’s just “natural male sexuality” ignores how artificial and extreme this level of access actually is. The harm doesn’t just affect the person consuming porn, it impacts the women in it, who are often exploted, and women in the modern dating world that have to deal with unrealistic expectations and porn-driven violence and entitlement.

Just like Young argues, bioessentialism isn’t harmless. It is used to excuse behavior that causes real harm by making it seem inevitable, and vanishing accountability for those who are engaging in them. Saying “men are visual creatures” works the same way as saying “girls throw like that”. It hides socialization behind biology.

No One Mourns the Sick: The Wicked Myth That the Pandemic Is ‘Over’
by

No One Mourns the Sick: The Wicked Myth That the Pandemic Is ‘Over’

You don’t have to watch Wicked to know its famous line—“No one mourns the Wicked”—which basically means that some people aren’t worth grieving. This kept echoing in my head when I heard that both lead actresses of the Wicked: For Good film recently tested positive for COVID.

According to a recent Guardian article, “Both Grande and Cynthia Erivo tested positive for Covid during the filming of the first movie, temporarily delaying production. Erivo reportedly contracted the virus days before shooting the climactic first-act number Defying Gravity, while Grande tested positive before filming the song “Popular.”

The same article notes that during the current press tour Ariana Grande again tested positive, forcing her to miss several events.

That news made me think of Mia Mingus. In her blog “You Are Not Entitled to Our Deaths”, Mingus challenges the idea that disabled or sick bodies are disposable and that those lives aren’t worth protecting or grieving. After reading this blog and our discussion in class, it made me remember hearing about the Wicked news. It made me realize we’re acting like COVID is just a production hiccup, an inconvenience to filming or press tours, rather than the ongoing threat which is killing and disabling countless people. The fact that both leads got sick, during filming and promotion, yet the media and public reaction centers on delays, missed appearances, and disappointed fans speaks volumes.

There’s something horrifyingly Wicked-like about how illness is framed now. If someone masks, they’re “paranoid.” If they don’t appear for a photoshoot or premiere, fans complain. When someone gets COVID, the conversation is about wasted money on promotion, fan backlash over missed premieres, or travel delays , but  rarely about health, recovery, or the toll illness takes. The framing treats sickness as a hiccup, not as human suffering. It treats the sick body as a burden to the show, not as a person in need of care.

“Grande’s positive test was the latest hiccup for the full-court Wicked press blitz that has seen the cast hop continents by the day. Due to flight delays, Grande was unable to make the premiere in Brazil, triggering fan backlash she also addressed on her Instagram.”

That is exactly the kind of abled entitlement Mingus warns about: a culture that assumes certain bodies can and should be sacrificed for convenience. Under this logic, “the show must go on,” regardless of who gets hurt. The Wicked cast situation isn’t just celebrity news, but it’s a reflection of a larger societal pattern where health, disability, and our shared vulnerability are minimized, ignored, or erased entirely.

What’s even worse is how normalized this erasure has become. COVID has become “another thing,” something to power through so cameras and promotions stay on schedule. Workplaces expect people to show up sick. Students are told to push through fevers. Long-term effects are brushed off as “just fatigue.” Public health infrastructure? Largely forgotten. Masks, ventilation, testing are all optional. People who get sick frequently or live with chronic conditions are expected to adapt or be pushed aside.

Mingus doesn’t just name this as negligence, she instead frames it as violence. When we treat care as optional, when we prioritize productivity over people, when we mourn canceled premieres more than lost lives, we are making a statement about whose lives matter. We’re deciding who gets protection, who gets grief, and who doesn’t.

We shouldn’t act like the pandemic is over. We need to stop shrugging when someone gets sick, framing illness as inconvenience, or acting like the only thing that matters is the show going on. Production, entertainment, or convenience is not more important than actual human lives. Because if we care at all about disability justice, about valuing every life, then we can’t pretend the pandemic is done. We have to mourn the sick. We have to fight for care. And we have to stop believing the myth that pushing on by ignoring risk, ignoring illness is normal or acceptable.

by

Disabled Comm(unity)

“If you don’t respect yourself and you don’t demand what you believe in for yourself, you’re not gonna get it.” -Judy Heumann

A photo taken at camp Jened. In the foreground to the right are two people, one of which supports the other via an arm slung around the neck. In the background are four figures sitting in wheelchairs.

An accepting environment is the backbone to an unfractured society. For marginalized communities, the opportunity to exist wholly – to present as you wish to without masking, trying to fit in, to just be without fear of discrimination or worse – is few and far between.
Camp Jened was a safe space to meet other people who knew the struggle of living in a world that is majorly inaccessible; some campers even stated that it felt like a second home to them. For Woodyard, it was one of exposure, a different way of living than he’d known in Alabama. LeBrecht explained feeling as though he had to fit into a world that wasn’t made for him. O’Toole told about how she would pretend to be able-bodied, hiding her cane under the couch. The weight of masking’s burden remains unknown until you no longer have to pretend. Only once that weight is removed do you realize the damage its done, yet how freeing it feels to live without it.

Heumann, explaining how she took special education classes that were in the basement of her school, stated that “in some way, even when we were that young, we knew that we were all being sidelined”. Similarly to Heumann, I also took special education classes in high school. My experience with them was quite frankly horrible and my teacher brought students to tears multiple times due to a short temper with questions regarding the material. Jened was empowering: an environment curated specifically with those cast to the sidelines in mind, encouraging them to raise up their bat and knock able-bodied expectations out of the park.
A topic discussed amongst the campers in the film was parents. One camper expressed distaste for her parents’ overprotectiveness, and another raised that many parents often wish to conceal the disabledness of their child out of fear. The coddling you face as a disabled person is endlessly frustrating, and when you speak out about it, you’re likely to be told that “well, it’s coming from a place of love, so you can’t be mad”. A parent should of course protect their children, but there is a line between protection and infantilization, and too often does it cross the line into the latter.

by

For all my chronically ill baddies- you are disabled enough.

I have been chronically ill since I was 16. It started with POTS. Then came the classic Fibromyalgia. Chronic Lyme Disease. You name it. But I didn’t label myself as disabled back then. “Chronically ill” was the phrasing I used. Back then I didn’t know much about the disability community. I was just a sick teenager and young adult.

Then in 2020 I was diagnosed with an degenerative autoimmune disease- Ankylosing Spondilitis. I had to be put on immunosuppressant medication; the only thing that would stop the progression of my disease. It was scary to be immunocomprimised during the pandemic. I had to be really careful, and I basically couldn’t do anything or leave my house.

This is when I started learning about the disability community. I began to identify as disabled. I started educating myself about disability rights, and quickly became an advocate online. And of course some people decided this was too much for them. My (ex lol) best friend broke up with me (via text) spouting some nonsense about talking about my disability too much. She also claimed I was faking my autism (I had recently begun to self diagnose, and would later go on to recieve an official diagnosis) for attention. My own parents constantly questioned me about my referral of myself as disabled. It caused me so much pain and imposter syndrome.

Thankfully, I was able to work through this and come out on the other side, proud to call myself disabled. I am greatful for my friends and family that support me, help me, and care for me. They don’t dismiss me. I know I am disabled enough.

by

“Grotesque” Bodies In Horror Films

How many horror movies include fat characters? How many of those movies portray their fat characters as people with morbid bodies? Unfortunately, the abuse of fat bodies in horror films is a trend that has been very popular in the movie industry. Blade (1998), is my favorite example of the manipulation of bigger bodies to make it seem like the fatter you are, the grosser you are. A minor character in the movie, Pearl, was a vampire antagonist who got tortured for answers regarding an infamous vampire syndicate. Pearl’s obesity was turned into an instrument of disgust. Her skin was blemished with whatever torture mechanisms had been used. Human’s disgust with skin is also a fascinating aspect in the whole topic. Films oftentimes dramatically stretch, twist, and blemish skin to make a person seem inherently gross. Another example I find myself thinking about frequently is in The Walking Dead. There are a multitude of fat zombies in the series and almost always, those zombies are killed or displayed with the contents of their stomach laying out. These scenes tell me that the stomach is the feature of our bodies that we fear and think to be disgusting. It’s not only TWD that does this either. Every single zombie movie I’ve watched has had at least two fat characters who are either killed in an incredibly violating way, or who are absolutely grotesque zombies. Moving out of the supernatural realm, the antagonist Anne Wilkes in the movie Misery is a bigger woman who holds her favorite author captive so he can rewrite the sequel to her favorite book series. Anne’s body is portrayed as monstrous due to her size which can be interpreted as the masculinization of fat female bodies. Towards the ending of the movie, Anne and the author are fighting each other for the freedom of the author. The author struggles a great deal against the smaller woman (granted, he was in a wheelchair, but he still would realistically be stronger than the woman especially since he had been “training” with a 15-20 pound type writer daily). After multiply bashing her in the head with the typewriter, she kept getting up. These are only a few examples, however, it is important to keep in my mind how often fat bodies are portrayed in this way.

Zombieland has another example of fatphobia not even 2 minutes into the movie

by

Why are breasts so sexual?

Growing up Baptist, I was always told that my body was to be hidden, especially the breasts. I always wondered why that is. AFAB people have breasts, consisting of tissue and mammary glands to give life, to feed their young. Why is that sexual? As a lesbian, I understand the appeal, but once again, why is there such a deep seated sexualization of these two orbs of tissue? An example of the sexualization of breasts is seen in the change of saree styles pre and post British rule in India. Before the western influence, sarees were often worn without a blouse under it, simply consisting of a long piece of cloth draped around the body. With the British rule came the western ideals of modesty, leading to sarees being worn almost exclusively with blouses in the modern day, ensuring there is no breast visible. I remember being 15, babysitting for an Indian family that taught me this. The mother who is now a dear friend of mine showed me historical portraits of Hindu deities, many of which had breasts visible, specifically the goddess Durga. She is a warrior goddess, seen as a symbol of feminine strength, depicted in ancient sculptures with breasts uncovered, the breasts being a part of symbolizing feminine strength. In this sculpture, she is seen slaying a buffalo-headed beast called Mahisha. (See photo.) Durga was a fierce warrior while simultaneously being a symbol for motherhood and maternal love. She is the Hindu maternal protector of the universe itself.

The first photo is a painting of a woman wearing a saree in the 19th century. The second photo is of a woman wearing a saree in 1910.

Breasts themselves are not sexual, rather they a reflection of the broader societal issues regarding women’s bodies. Sexualizing breasts gives men power over them by making women uncomfortable with them being visible or sexualised, leading to a change in women’s behavior, in this case, covering the breasts. If men are ogling something about your body, you will feel pressured to hide it, therefore the men have the power over what of the body is shown. It all goes back to the patriarchy.

by

Did the Parents of Our Hominin Ancestors Proclaim Clothing to be Unnatural?

Throughout various abhorrent efforts to dehumanize any given particular group, the question of what is deemed ‘natural’ has often been present. The concept of ‘naturalness’ is made to be synonymous with ‘goodness,’ ‘correctness,’ and any term that denotes a certain level of social acceptability or praise. Yet, the definition of ‘natural’ does not indicate some infallible or permanently held state of being. Rather, it is an ever-changing term, constantly adjusting to new norms and technologies as our society changes.

Continue Reading
by

May I Have Another Label For My Ever Changing Body?

The image above features Michaela Stark on display at the Milan Fashion Week in 2024. Michaela is an Australian “body-morphing” artist currently located in London, who has made several headlines for her ‘Panty’ clothing line, which consists of lingerie and undergarments geared for “all bodies.” She perfectly captures the ways in which our clothing shapes and defines us, and never the other way around. I found Michaela in a sea full of Instagram models, body dysphoric rhetoric, and promotions of every possible procedure to fix every possible flaw of the body, media we consume every single second. Her work was eye-catching, shocking, and…normal.

What is possibly normal about contouring the body in such outrageous ways only to be put on display? Exactly. And yet it has been normalized in every other context by labels. The thin bodies we have shoved down our throats (while completely dismissing our own) are fit to be morphed and changed however need be, whether that be through soft shapewear or restricting corsets. Thin bodies are the ideal, and they must be accompanied by hairless and flawless skin. There mustn’t be a blemish in sight, a wrinkle to see, a stretch mark to grieve. Michaela Stark does this same thing, but we know it’s different. Except we know it’s not different but media has told us it is and so it must be. We all share the burden of having a “broken” body, the only difference is whether your body was born “broken” or conditioned into being “broken.” We all have something we must be desperately fixing at any moment.

And even through political, social, and public statements that individuals like Michaela Stark make (whether that be through voice or body) where is the representation for men? Society holds tight to how a woman should be, and perhaps we are given some lenience because our bodies are meant to change (not by much though, don’t get ahead of yourself) through the natural processes of pregnancy and birth (yes, I know how demoralizing that is to women anyway), but men don’t get this recognition because it’s socialized to us that they don’t need it. A man’s body should only change for the better: gaining muscle, growing taller, being smarter, stoic. Women are the clay that is never left untouched, always malleable in another person’s hands. Men are the statues, the pyramids, never to fall or be broken down. And a statue should NEVER change. Who knows what waits for you when you don’t identify as either of those things.

My point is that labels are damning, the same way our bodies are socialized and conditioned to be damned. Whether you learn this through the words of Stryker’s My Words to Frankenstein, the sociological concepts of Patricia Collins, or the memoirs in Duane and Rajunov’s Nonbinary, we need no explanation for how this affects us. Through personal experience, we already know. The next step is how we break down these labels that separate us from our bodies, and innovators like Michaela Stark are a perfect example of such. It’s also critical we nip this body-dysphoric-rhetoric in the bud, right at the source: by teaching our children to evolve and grow for their own personal empowerment and not to fit social code. Our girls must know courage and strength the same way our boys receive it. Our boys must know emotion and compassion the way our girls receive it. Most importantly, I think, is instilling these traits as good qualities of a person, rather than subjecting them to a gender binary that supports no one.

Michaela Stark represents a movement of bodies, and in that name we must assume this includes EVERY BODY. If we wish to combat the social construct of the body as its ingrained in our everyday reality, let us begin with abstract thinking.

Sources (and/or more to read):

Magnificent Michaela Stark

Michaela Stark Milan Fashion Week 2024

Michaela Stark in Fashion Film

The Muse’s Misfortune
by

The Muse’s Misfortune

The Muse’s Misfortune 

To be a muse is to be worthy. To be a muse is to be beautiful and talented, chosen and seen. To be a muse is to be exhilarated and exhausted, honored and objectified, proud and pornified. There cannot be one state of being without the other, so long as there is one being to perceive and one being to be perceived.

Read more: The Muse’s Misfortune

In some societies, perhaps, it is possible for a muse to exist without the constant fear and awareness of their own and another’s presence. In patriarchal and sexist cultures, however, the muse faces an internal and external threat of surveillance, and therefore sexualization. “(Patriarchal and sexist) society defines woman as object, as a mere body, and… are in fact frequently regarded by others as objects and mere bodies” (Young, I. “Throwing Like a Girl: A Phenomenology of Feminine Body Comportment Motility and Spatiality,” p. 153-154). For feminine muses, they “learn to live out (their) existence in accordance with the definition that patriarchal culture assigns to (them, and) are physically inhibited, confined, positioned, and objectified” (152). The definition becomes internalized, which then manipulates and forces women into being more feminine- more submissive, docile, small, quiet. “Women often approach a physical engagement with things with timidity, uncertainty, and hesitancy… (They) lack an entire trust in (their) bodies to carry (them to their) aims. There is… a double hesitation here. On the one hand, (women) lack confidence that (they) have the capacity to do what must be done… The other side of this tentativeness is… a fear of getting hurt… (They) often experience (their) bodies as a fragile encumbrance, rather than the medium for the enactment of (their) aims” (143-144). The subordination of feminine beings is at the root of patriarchy, and it grows as more minds and bodies accept the notion that feminine and masculine categories cannot intermingle. The stronger the patriarchy becomes, the more ‘natural’ it seems that feminine bodies are weaker than masculine bodies. In reality, women “have more of a tendency than men to greatly underestimate our bodily capacity,” as well as the relentless pressure of being perceived as a muse, which results in under-performance.

by

The World Limits My Body and My Body Limits Me

On July 1, 2022, I wrote the following entry:

“Whether I want to admit it or not, my growth is relevant, is obvious…but not when it comes to my body. Kind of. I can’t explain it. I do feel better about myself. I enjoy what I look like…and haven’t used my body as an obstacle or excuse of not trying. But that trauma from being bigger still lingers. What people think of me still stays in the back of my mind, when I get hit on in public it still surprises me…”

Phenomenology teaches us that bodies are not just biological objects but lived experiences, shaping how we perceive, move through, and make meaning of the world. It is the “science of the essence of consciousness.” It is with that then, that we recognize that our Western society has nothing to prepare us for this type of perspective. We are forced to live so physically in our world that we often resort to theories and philosophies to provide cushioning and comfort, but it us that must invoke that change. This is where we feel stuck. The tools and unlimited opportunities but too many fixed mindsets to put it into action. It’s something we feel when we’re 16 and likely what we’ll feel when we’re 60, the outside pressure of constantly separating one’s body from the mind.

What my 16-year-old mind didn’t realize was that there was an exact name for my feeling, an effect of society’s demands: Feminine Motility. How women may move if they must. That’s the feeling you get, anyway. We describe this detached feeling of our body as Ambiguous Transcendence, where we are both separated but bound to our body. The verbal “I can” which ultimately becomes “I can’t” under Inhibited Intentionality, and the Discontinuous Unity, where one severs their capacity in the body from the possibility of the world. At every more we are controlled, questioned, and doubted from something we can’t see but recognize.

It’s an unbelievable reality to merely stumble upon one day, usually in your adolescence. I think that’s the point too, to get you when you’re your most fragile, mentally. It feels damning, but then you get older, and at some point your mind aligns with your physical age and I think that’s what it means to enter adulthood and understand Phenomenology. To recognize that our body is a biological being, but also something that transcends beyond the physical world and our social boundaries. Moving (both emotionally and literally) from childhood to adolescence to adulthood is a painful process, one we can’t understand until we’ve been through it.