Wednesday, June 21, 2006

"HIMBOS"??

My morning ritual generally involves breakfast in front of the Today show, and this morning I was somewhat flabbergasted by a story on "himbos" - the male equivalent of a bimbo, or someone who is basically arm candy but not over taxing their brains. The ultimate example they gave is Kevin Federline. WHAT?!?!?!

One of the things that really got me about this story was when the woman editor from Seventeen magazine made a comment about this showing how far we have come - that women are getting more powerful and so are now looking for "weak" and pretty boys to have on their arms as they go about their powerful lives. Whoa. Is this really progress? Is the goal for women to degrade men in the same ways that they have been degraded for the past hundreds of years? I understand the concept (although I think the word himbo makes the whole things way cheesy and lacking in the derogatory meaning of the female bimbo), but this doesn't seem like anything we should be proud of or airing on a national news program. Okay, it's the Today show - not the nightly news, but still, how many people watch this show and take it seriously?? So what do you think - do you know any himbos? Do you think the concept is a sign of the progress women have made in society??

2 comments:

Trouble said...

i tried to comment earlier, but it exploded, so i'll try again.

i don't think "himbo" will stick. it sounds to forced. i don't know the origin of "bimbo" do you?

forcing the opressor into the form of the former opressed is no way to fix a problem, or even make us feel better.

hipchickmamma said...

i agree that simply switching or joining power stuctures is not progress. ditto to trouble's comment.

on a lighter note....kevin federline as arm candy? what is going on? i don't see how he even remotely qualifies!

lastly, the reality is that there is not a possible male equivalent of bimbo/whore/etc because if a guy is getting nookie then by definition he has won. it still does not matter if a man sleeps with every woman he meets, he is still a stud and upheld by other males.

i heard some guys talking about the latest teacher student scandal (the very pretty blonde and the young boy) these guys did not see this boy as being molested or harmed--quite to the contrary, he had lived out "every boys" dream come true.

there is no balance of power in sex. it doesn't exist. yes, women get more credit about having their own sexual desires but they are still sluts and whores when they act on them, rape is still a monsterous reality for most women. the sex game between women and men is still being won by men. say what you will about the use of competetive language--i dont' think it's the most effective but i'm tired and bitchy and it's the best i can come up with at the moment.

i had intended to be light and funny and all i did was get really pissed off! urgh!

i also grant that this is a fairly strict heterosexist argument, except in that most lesbians and gay men (at least that i know) have experience with dating the oppistie sex at least once in their life, and hence the women are still privy to date rape or potential rape victims, just from being women.

i'm really stoping now.