Self-Regulatory Body Investigates Her Risque Launch Campaign for Devassa’s ‘Very Blonde’ Beer
Posted by Laurel Wentz on 02.25.10 @ 11:52 AM
(AdAge.com) — NEW YORK (AdAge.com) — Brazil’s self-regulatory body, Conar, is investigating an ad campaign starring Paris Hilton for Devassa Bem Loura beer for being too sexually provocative, even by the racy standards of Brazilian beer ads.
According to local trade publication Meio & Mensagem, Ad Age’s partner in Brazil, Conar this week opened three different investigations into local brewer Grupo Schincariol’s launch campaign for Devassa Bem Loura (Portuguese for “Very Blonde”) beer last month during Brazil’s riotous Carnival.
The first investigation is the result of a formal complaint by a consumer about the sensual nature of the ads, reported Meio & Mensagem journalist Alexandre Zaghi Lemos.
The campaign includes a spot by Sao Paulo agency Mood in which Ms. Hilton, dressed in a short, tight black dress, parades in front of the window in a high-rise office building rubbing a can of Devassa Bem Loura beer along her body. A guy in another office spots her through the window, grabs a camera, and begins filming her. On the street below, a crowd gathers to watch her.
Get Global News delivered to your inbox — register for the new weekly Ad Age Global newsletter.
Conar’s code governing beer advertising specifies that “appeals to sensuality won’t constitute the principal content of the message” and adds that “advertising models won’t be treated as sex objects.” (Brazilian beer marketers often get around this by giving beer ads a beach setting, where it’s considered appropriate for models to wear tiny bikinis.)
The second investigation, started by Conar itself, is targeting a promotion on the beer’s website that may violate rules against promotional activities that encourage excessive consumption.
The launch of the Devassa Bem Loura extension of the Devassa brand started as a TV and online teaser campaign about a mysterious blonde, and the beer marketer spread the word Bem Misteriosa on Twitter. The website featured a keyhole that grew as people tweeted #bemmisteriosa, finally revealing Paris Hilton, a celebrity guest at Carnival in the beer marketer’s VIP box at the samba school parade in Rio de Janeiro.
On the Devassa website (at www.devassa.com.br and www.bemmisteriosa.com.br), Paris Hilton perches on a bar stool holding a beer glass in the same tight black dress, next to the words “Very Irreverent, Very Blonde, Very Devassa. Finally She’s Arrived.” Elsewhere on the site, in a jukebox feature with different music options, she poses next to the jukebox wearing black lingerie, fishnet stockings, stiletto heels and a top hat. The commercial is also on the site.
Meio & Mensagem is Brazil’s leading weekly magazine and website devoted to covering advertising, media and marketing in Latin America’s largest market.
A third investigation was started Wednesday afternoon at the request of the Brazilian government’s Secretariat for Womens’ Affairs, alleging that content on Devassa’s site is sexist and disrespectful to women.
In the next steps, Conar will formally notify both the advertiser and the agency that the investigations have been opened, and they have 10 days to submit a written response. Informally, the news is all over Brazilian blogs, provoking lively comments about both the campaign and Ms. Hilton.
Socialite Paris Hilton is considering marrying beau Doug Reinhardt, who has struck the right chords with her parents.
Hilton, who turned 29 Feb 17, celebrated her birthday with “The Hills” star in Las Vegas and admitted she couldn’t be happier, reports femalefirst.co.uk.
Asked about their wedding plans, she said: “We’ll see what happens in the future, but right now we are so happy to be together and we are really in love.”
The duo were joined at nightspot Tao by her parents Rick and Kathy Hilton.
“What a fun night! My mom and Doug were so cute dancing together! I love how my parents love my love! We all had a blast! Great night,” Paris posted on her Twitter page.
Stella & Dot already has a heavy celebrity following, with Debra Messing, Barbara Walters and Paris Hilton counted as our biggest fans. And Stella & Dot is loved by the press, continually receiving kudos for their quality jewelry in magazines such as Oprah, InStyle, Lucky and Marie Claire, and for their exceptional, sky-rocketing success during a recession, as seen on the Today Show, The View and in Working Mother Magazine and the San Francisco Business Times.
And let us not forget the TV darling, Jillian Harris of The Bachelorette. She loved Stella & Dot jewelry so much that she wore at least one piece from the line on each and every episode, including the gold Penelope Necklace, the Turquoise Sea Earrings and the gold Jasmine Filigree Earrings.
And now, even more celebs love the line as they got to know the brand even more at the Golden Globes award show. Check out the celebs below who loved the jewelry — women and men included!
| View Show | Create Your Own
Celebs Wearing Stella & Dot Jewelry: * Singer Aubrey O’Day of Danity Kane wearing the Sayulita Statement Necklace (as seen in InStyle!)
* Singer/Songwriter Colbie Callait wearing the Byblos Chandelier Necklace
* American Idol judge Kara Dioguardi wearing the Cascading Chain Necklace
* Olympic athlete and Dancing With The Stars contestant Maurice Green wearing the Cross Necklace
* The Hills actress Stephanie Pratt wearing the Colette Necklace * Entourage star Debi Mazar wearing the Sofia Pearl Bib Necklace
* Twilight and New Moon star Taylor Lautner wearing the Signature Cross Necklace
This morning Nicole Richie was on Regis & Kelly, she looks absofuckinglutely amazing! Those two, yes two children, were the best thing that could have ever happened to her. Honestly the last time I remember seeing anything about her was during the Simple Life days when she was like 90 pounds of organs and bones. She even has dark hair now which makes her look absolutely amazing. Perhaps the divorce of Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie was really for the best….
Should I be afraid of the PUA hordes? They really seem to have proliferated the internet recently. Specifically Roissyism hard-edged PUA. And while it is true just about any topic has exploded on the web, PUA is on just about any blog or forum when the issue of boys getting girls comes up. And there is a whole biological, social, and political theory behind it. On the other hand they are already the barbarians INSIDE the gates. This is their empire.
Dang it. I typed up a really long post, and it was lost. Well I will try to summarize the main points.
I freed myself from all desires Buddha-like. But without desires there is nothing to aspire for.
Actually I do have goals, but competing for honor is useless if no one wants it and it is given away freely.
I BELIEVED I could have relations with attractive girls back in JR/HS in that sense it was a choice not to.
Do I oppose PUA out of sympathy for girls, or because as an omega male, I can’t enjoy its fruits?
An omega male is a failed alpha male. He has great self-confidence, but shouldn’t.
I opposed 3 aspects of this age
1. Roissyism
2. Boss
3. Barriers
Boss matters mostly because it endorses 1 and 3. 3 prevents me from enjoying 1.
3 is the only place where changes in my personal life would make a difference. Its the equivalent of there being a strong trench. Instead of attacking it I decided to drop an atomic bomb on it. But first I have to research theoretical physics. And I end up studying Ancient greek atomic theory. Thats my way of attacking the trench studying Democritus in the library.
Ok thats a brief summary of what was lost. Its a real shame, that was a long post that really got into a lot of points.
But the debate goes on and on, so we will probably hit the same points and flesh them out in future posts.
It never ceases to amaze me when I see who shows up on a TV gig or their own show these days. In many instances, it doesn’t matter if they have talent, a skill, and education, on camera experience, charisma or the IT factor. It seems that these days if some women take of their clothes, sleep with a rich and powerful married guy, make a sex tape, have lots of babies at once, or are a train wreck, there is a good chance you may make it to the TV screen for your 15 minutes to one hour of fame if not more.
PROSTITUTES, MISTRESSESS AND CALL GIRLS AS A WAY OF ACHIEVING FAME YOU KA TELL SHE DIDN’T HAVE” IT” ON TV
While Rachel Uchitel May have IT in the bedroom, based on her affairs with rich and powerful men including, Tiger Woods, in my view she was clearly ITLESS as she appeared on Extra with her nasal monotone, choked off , throat- closing voice, and lack of charisma .Even so, this ITLESS non- camera talent, like her or not, has a regular gig on Extra where she will be covering the party scene.
FORMER NY GOV. ELLIOT SPITZER’S PROSTITUTE GIVING ADVICE?
Equally “ ITLESS” non-camera talent who obviously had IT in the bedroom was prostitute Ashley Dupree, who’s liason with former NY Governor Elliott Spitzer, stripped him of his office. As much IT as she had in the bedroom, was as much” ITLESSNESS” she had when she appeared throughout the media giving advice to the other prostitute/ call girls/ mistresses and to Tiger’s wife Elin. Dupree consistently wore a mean-looking mono- faced expression as she doled out her limited and in my view lame advice!
Yet, she is not only giving that advice over the airwaves on top rated shows, this uneducated unprofessionally trained Elliot Spitzer prostitute, is disseminating advice on a regular basis in print , in the New York Post.
TIGER’S TEAM OF MISTRESSES REGULAR APPEARANCES IN THE MEDIA
J
Tiger’s whores and mistresses and call girls are also cashing in big and getting their share of fame. Jaime Grubbs who is now posing for Maxim magazine and Jaime Jungers both got their 15 minutes of fame by appearing on top rated shows as the Today Show and Access Hollywood. Apparently there is also talk of a reality show consisting of all of Tiger’s mistresses.
While Jungers is monotone and monofaced, I do believe that Jaime Grubbs, actually seems to have little bit of the IT factor.
She has some life to her based on how she comes across in her interviews. I especially saw some watchability and likeability in her personality as she recently appeared in a Radaronline interview discussing her Native American heritage.
MULTIPLE BABY-MAKING AS A WAY OF ACHIEVING FAME AND NOTORIETY
NADYA
Now, ITLESS Nadya Suleman who’s claim to fame was irresponsibly undergoing fertility treatment to have 8 more children when already had 6 that she could barely care for, is allegedly in talks with the Game Show Network about doing a dating show with her.
While she definitely needs the money to feed and care for her brood, getting your own show when you have no media experience is absurd. If she hosts a talk show I think that is a bad idea.
But if she has a show where the premise of the show is to find her a boyfriend or a husband to help her with her babies, that might be a good idea. After all, why shouldn’t Nayda get some love in her life? I only hope it is not a show where her babies will be ever exploited. So far she has been really good about not exposing them.
KATE
Then there is the other woman who also rose to public fame as a result of taking fertility pills and ending up with sextuplets. On her Jon and Kate Plus 8 Show we saw Kate Gosselin abuse her husband, yell at her kids, throw things, and have multiple tantrums. It was not a pretty sight.
On her TLC Specials we saw her self -centeredness, sarcasm, snarkiness and arrogance up close and personal, as we watched her disrespectfully throw her papers on the ground containing viewers questions. Then we had to endure her fake tears as she publically complained about the father of her children.
Nevertheless, TLC is rewarding Kate’s abusive and bad behavior with her own show. They aren’t even sure of the format. At first they said it would be a talk show. Then it was changed to a dating show and apparently now it is a show where Kate does various jobs, like the old Simple Life on MTV with Paris Hilton and Nichole Richie.
While they are trying to give Kate some experience and develop her chops by having her serve a guest host on the View, in my personal view she still remains ITLESS. No matter how many image makeovers or hair extensions they give her and how much money she needs to support her brood, I personally can’t seem to erase the images of all of her egregious and abusive behaviors that have been engrained in my mind as I recall her previous antics on TV and in photos throughout the years.
And please don’t tell me what inspirational single mothers Kate and Nadya are and how difficult it is to have so many children to raise. No one forced the fertility drugs down their throats. They knew the risks, especially Kate who was a bona fide nurse at the time.
These two have an army of nannies and helpers, giving them plenty of time to get hair extensions and their nails done regularly, go to the gym, and pick out nice outfits to wear, as they gallivant around in limos to get them their various TV gigs.
Instead, tell me about the single mothers who have to do it ALL by themselves- the cooking the cleaning the clothes washing, the driving, the care taking on a full-time basis, so they don’t have time to go to the gym or get their hair done or nails manicured .
Tell me about the mothers who have to raise their kids on their OWN with NO HELP and yet stay up late and during their kid’s nap times and school times, take classes on- line so they can get a college education and earn a degree to better their lives. These women are inspirations to me and would be to any young woman out there.
.
NUDE PHOTOS AND MAKING A SEX TAPE AS A WAY OF ACHIEVING FAME
KIM KARDASHIAN
While Kim Kardashian is very pretty, after she opens her mouth and you hear her uptalk, nasality and monotone in my opinion, that is where her prettiness ends. Why is this woman famous and how did she become famous enough for her and her entire family to now have a reality show on E!
“No one heard of Kim Kardashian until she made sex tape where her ample butt was featured. That paved the way for her and her sisters to become household names. Today they are featured in practically every magazine in the country on a regular basis.
TILA TEQUILA
Then there is Tila Tequila who everyone seemed to forget about after her show, “A Shot With Tila Tequila” 1 and 2 on MTV ended. But recently, after a sex tape of her surfaced giving oral sex to someone, being allegedly abused by a former boyfriend, and becoming engaged to now deceased Johnson and Johnson heiress Casey Johnson, and now her alleged developing pregnancy, she is suddenly back in the limelight where her every move appears to be documented on Radaronline.
SNOOKI
Now an alleged sex tape and definate naked photos have allegedly surfaced of diminutive Snooki of the Jersey Shore, no doubt insuring that she will retain top star status of her show, if not a spinoff of her own show which she has mentioned she wants. She’s even names it “Sookin for Love.” There is no doubt that someone will eventually give her some type of show.
GIVING YOUNG WOMEN A WRONG MESSAGE
While I’m all for being making a living and even making that living on television, in my view, I feel that rewarding women for bad, vulgar or lewd abusive, or irresponsible behavior by giving them a show and an opportunity to be a role model, gives a very bad message to our future generation of young women.
I see it as a setback to women who have struggled so hard to gain respect and dignity that has been so difficult to achieve.
Women have worked very hard for equality and respect over the past three decades. Today women are in positions that they would never have been in decades ago. They are doctors, lawyers, CEO’s, politicians, judges , businesswomen, philanthropists, entrepreneurs, and world leaders.
SEEING THE RIGHT WOMEN WHO INSPIRE AND HAVE SOMETHING TO OFFER
Some of the top movers and shakers in the world are women. These are the women who are talented and accomplished and have so much to offer
They inspire others and need to be rewarded and looked up to as role models in my view. Women who have made it on their own, against all odds ,and who have done unselfish things for others also need to be looked up to and admired and rewarded in my opinion.
ANGELINA AND HAYDEN AS INSPIRATIONS
No matter what you think of Angelina Jolie, she in my view , a wonderful woman who is as beautiful on the inside as she is on the outside. She is a great role model to women. Not only did she adopt needy children, she raises social awareness of what is going on with women and children in third world countries.
Even young and beautiful actress Hayden Panettiere is someone to be looked up to as she puts her passion into a worldwide crisis — being dedicated to save dolphins.
Their positive behavior, education, unselfish actions, awareness and genuine accomplishments need to be rewarded- not the reverse.
In my view I think that having these type of women on a television show where they can be a voice to other women and serve as a role model would be so beneficial to young people.
YOUNG WOMEN SEEING OTHER INSPIRING WOMEN ON TV
Mind you thes type of women on TV do exist in the form of Oprah, Ellen, Nancy Grace, Diane Sawyer, Katie Couric, Mary Hart, Joy Behar, Meredith Viera, Heidi Klum, Jane Velez Mitchell, Greta Van Sustern, Tyra Banks, Robin Roberts, Barbara Walters, Julie Chen, Chelsea Lately, Rachel Ray, and Whoopie Goldberg. Seeing these type of wonderful women over the airwaves needs to happen more in my view.
Young women need to look at these women and others as a means of inspiring them towards being the best they can be!
They need to see that it is a woman’s brains, behavior, actions, accomplishments talents, and abilities that should inspire them- not the fact that someone has spread their legs, shown off their booty, shown ugly abusive and self-centered behavior or are talentless and ITLESS.
There are way too many other women out there who have worked hard to gain the respect and recognition they deserve They have proven talent and abilities and have IT.
Let’s go forward with these type of women, not backward! Let’s feature women who can inspire our future generation of young women. www.drlillianglass.com
Last summer when my hair was bleach blonde, I went to my first NYC Gay Bar somewhere in Midtown with two of my favorite Pi Phi girls. Drawn to this location by the allure of open bar until 11 p.m, I hastily handed the bouncer my I.D. Before checking my age and letting me into the bar, he immediately said that the flip flops I’d worn out of the inevitably of walking in NY were unacceptable. He proceeded to let me in anyway.
Later that night in the girls’ bathroom that also happened to be filled with guys, a guy screamed, “NO HEELS AND AN OLD COACH BAG! WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?” I was shocked, but I shrugged it off, laughed, and made a negative comment about his T-Shirt. We hugged and made up.
As I always say, “A socialite never compromises or explains herself.” The truly elite are low-key and are never out impress anyone. As the great American socialite and businesswoman, Paris Hilton, once said, “I’m totally normal. I think it’s obnoxious when people demand limos or bodyguards. I eat at McDonald’s or Taco Bell. My parents always taught us to be humble. We’re not spoiled.” Back in my hometown of Wilmington, DE, Mrs. DuPont was known to walk into the department store stinking from her afternoon horseback ride still clad in her sweaty riding gear. When you no longer have anyone to impress, doing what you want to do exactly when you want to do it becomes your only priority. You answer to no one, but yourself. If I don’t feel like walking heels, flip flops are what’s hot. Even if something is from 5 seasons ago, if you wear it like it’s this season: IT IS. Without this mentality, trends such as UGG boots made popular by independent-minded celebrities such as Paris would never have existed. I still carry that Coach bag all the time and am proud to make my own. Live your life this way, and you too can live the fab life of a trust funder and most importantly a trendsetter.
Don’t you feel like you’ve missed out on something? I was asked that the summer before college, over never having kissed a girl. No, I said without missing a beat. And I meant it. I really believed that I stood for something better. This has nothing to do with Roissyism. Alphas, betas, and their targets were all equally classed together. I didn’t exactly believe in live and let live, but I didn’t center my life around their wrong doings. I had a better road, and life would prove me right. Well life didn’t prove me right. I invested much more, and ended up losing much more than if I had just consumed.
But is it impossible to go back to that position? I mean what if the rest have their fun, if that is what you also want than go for it, and if not then don’t. The perfect statement of a tolerant plural society. You have your morals and I’ll have mine. Bad morals drive out good. I think morality operates exactly the same as money supply. If you have debased gold currency competing with pure gold currency, then all pure goal will be driven out either through hording or export. Does this mean that debased gold is somehow “Superior” or “Stronger” or more Darwinian fit, than pure gold? It is precisely because it is objectively bad that it triumphs. The general tendency of morals is towards the lowest common denominator. This is why I don’t believe there can ever really be a plurality of morals.
But I mean lets say you had lived your Dream life. You accomplish everything you wish to, justice is done, the world is set right. If the price of that deed, was lifelong celebecy, not only would you pay the price, you would actually consider such a biography superior to that of an Aristotelean man who enjoyed some pleasures but not in excess. Your morality generally tends towards a worldly asceticism. You don’t believe in being a monk hidden away in the cloister, but you believe you can live up to the standards of monkhood while being active in the world. So in a way you WANT celibacy to be the price. You find the ideal of a totally dedicated fanatic denying himself all pleasure, superior to the reasonable well-balanced Aristotelean’s moderate hedonism. So its not just a life you would be willing to live it is your ideal life.
Where does that leave me after the Fall?
You could just a set a new goal, and dedicate yourself with the same intensity.
You don’t expect the entire population to be celibate and advocate voluntary human extinction. Even under ideal circumstances. In that sense the standards you set for yourself are unachievable even by a utopian populace.
You had a lot of high ideas about virtue, yet you never developed in a sophisticated manner what exactly was to be valued in them. Does it really make so much sense to be so anti-sexual as a matter of principle? I mean granted if we look at the real world of sexual relations there is much to object to. And it is easy to become cynical and jaded and dismiss any Disney notions of chaste love. And maybe romantic love is an impossible purity. But that doesn’t mean it should be condemned. I mean I guess in your younger days your position was all sex should only be for procreation, something of a national duty. Along a “Lie back and think of England” approach. Is that really superior to the loftiest of romantic love? I mean it is hard to approximate the Ideal. Even Romeo and Juliet is nothing more than a story of teen lust. But you do have an idea of what ideal romantic love would be even if it is totally unrealizable in our world. Now would sex in such a relationship be less honorable than Lie back and think of England?
So what if adventure became your life mission with the same zeal the grand ambition once held? You would not sacrifice the life of Indiana Jones in order to be Tucker Max. I mean in some sense an Indiana Jones life is also a form of hedonism. At least in and of itself, it doesn’t really do any good, adventure the quest for the exotic, the occult, mystical, enchanted, paranormal. Those are the pleasures you seek. And if you can link up the pursuit of those higher pleasures with some sort of utilitarianism so much the better. But this is not sour grapes. You would genuinely prefer to be Indiana Jones over Don Juan.
Well lets be honest. Your asceticism was somewhat overplayed. Maybe its toned down now. But to some extent you blurred the lines between morality and girls have cooties. There is no reason why virtue forbid you from having closer relations with the opposite sex, even going as far as what in high school would have been considered a “date”. At its rawest, this morality was a patronizing misogyny. You may not have been completely off the mark, but I think you took “virtue” beyond where it was justified. As the popular girl said in 8th grade, you were anti-girl. You wore that as a badge of pride because to you it proved incorruptibility. And perhaps more cynically you were playing hard to get, under the old maxim the worse you treat a girl, the more she likes you.
Well look if your just against life, and think it was a curse to be born in all conditions. Then say so. But if you think a life of adventure for a good cause, is better than never being born, then at least say precisely how “real” adventure is different than the multicultural USA alternative. I think your coming pretty close to saying existence itself under all circumstances is an evil. Well isn’t that the end result of saying pleasure in and of itself is evil. Granted pleasure is often tied to sadism, but if even the higher pleasures are to be denied, what is the point of existence other than suffering? So instead of framing it pleasure/ anti-pleasure, perhaps you ought to follow JS Mill with higher and lower pleasures.
Your so beaten, that I can’t be sure that you would even want to live the life of the Dream if it were offered to you.
Just as some refuse to accept failure, you ironically refuse to accept recovery out of Hubris. You stated so strongly that all was over and you were doomed, that to begin to rehabilitate would be to admit that you were majorly mistaken. Success would be a loss of face.
But the only ones who oppose your demise, are your parents. And they should not hold this much influence over you at your age. Losing face to them, shouldn’t be a concern. You resent them for underrating you, and yet the course of your life since high school is perfectly in line with their undervaluation and diametrically opposed to your overinflated self-image. Think like a scientist. Which cause would lead to this effect?
Your like a bubble economy, you need to crash before you can make genuine growth.
How tragic that it is you the long-term investor who ended up peaking in high school.
IDK decide strongly one way or the other and follow through. If you want to be doomed be doomed, if you want to be saved be saved. Neither is wrong. The only wrong choice is to continue waffling and doing nothing. Decide decisively one way or the other. If recovery is what you want make a full dedication to it.
Well ask yourself what possible future biography would make me want to recover. If you can’t think of any, or it is beyond the realm of possibility, then let us decisively give up on any dream of recovery. If there is a reachable goal, then lets commit all out to it.
Lets use the grand ambition as a starting point. You still haven’t rebuked it. First off you never considered GA a guarantee. So if you had lived the life of a mid-level military officer just stationed around the world, maybe some combat duty, and then an honorable retirement, that would have satisfied you. So what about that life is missing in civilian life? And remember that doesn’t change the existence of Roissy and Tucker Max. If anything it is more hypermasculine than the general population. Your whole life you have went for “manly” activities. So is that all this is about? You want to live an ascetic virginal life, yet at the same time you want your manhood to be beyond reproach?
Part of the problem is that with your college major, and this sunk economy, I can’t really paint you a specific picture of what your life would have been like. So its all pretty vague when we speak of what your career would be. Its hard for me to make you a concrete offer.
Well look if all you want out of life is to retire to a utopia, you can work a career, and then retire to either a hippie commune or a monastery once your financially secure. Unless it is hubris that you will only retire to a utopia you have created. Does it really matter if your utopia is not worldwide?
IF security is all your after. Getting a public sector job is not beyond the realm of possibility. And you have a union, your better protected but not immune from layoffs, basic benefits, decent retirement, and you can’t be fired without just cause.
The world just doen’t appeal to me. Theres no job I would really want to do. And I would just be working all day for a boss, to live in a world I don’t like.
I mean if thats your position. That the world is hellish. You can not survive in it. You don’t want to exist. Then let us strongly make that your position.
But were you or were you not wrong about your grand ambition? And if not what has changed? How is a career different?
Is it just a status thing? You want to be a leader? I mean you can make it your ambition to be a leader in any organization. Is it the glory of war? But be warned that the average soldier is more police guard than warrior in modern warfare.
Why is there no enchantment or charm with life?
You have lost the Hegelian struggle for recognition. And now your fate is to be the slave. Is that not what your reject?
Did it have to come to this? How did this misery come to pass? I wasn’t that miserable in elementary school. 1st grade was pretty bad. But after that I was bright academically, I lived in imagination and fantasy, and from 2nd-4th grade I had one friend, but one who I had many adventures was. It is true that in middle school I would look back on elementary school as a horrible time, but I was happy as a child. 6th grade was kind of rough. But I was evolving a new personality. From mouse to clown. I went for the class bad boy. He kicked me at first, tried to keep me away since I was annoying. But we became sort of friends.
So the first half of 6th grade was kinda crummy, but it was a training ground for the second half which was awesome. Ok, looking back on it a lot of it was fake. But at the time it was a New Jerusalem. A complete transformation. Things slowed down in 7th grade. And I became kind of bitter that friendships were all fakes. But I have some fond memories of innocent flirting. 8th to 9th grade was kind of a rough patch. But it was a necessarily adjustment period in which I went from having attention-getting as my goal to academic and athletic ambitions. And then I had some good years in high school. Its true it was all in my head. But there were some objective measures. And I didn’t have to act out for attention since I could live off my past. I was kind of a dignified elder statesman. Maybe that was a bad thing. I grew too conservative and content, and was unable to adapt to the changing social life of college.
I’m Charlotte Simmons by Tom Wolfe, that said it all about my college life. IDK was it that horrible? Frats are pretty bad. But honestly I was so anti-pleasure that I really didn’t give a damn about domination, I was just anti-pleasure period. I kind of blurred hedonism with Roissyism, which is not necessarily justified. But then again isn’t Tucker Max just fratire writ large? I saw the frat as the epitome of all USA culture, and felt myself to be doomed. Although I didn’t retreat. I suppose you could call it a ritualized rebellion. I rejected both the means and goals of society. At the same time while I accepted the means of rebellion, I ritualized it, and did it for the sake of duty, but did not genuinely have faith in the possibility of victory.
Well with such a grim pessimistic view of the total depravity of human nature, perhaps I should be more Hobbesian. That if order can be preserved, justice can be cast aside, because there is no greater injustice than the unleashing of the human instinct. With stability, I could just get any job, and be thankful for a slow steady growth in income. Yes evil men can enjoy great pleasure under this stability, but be thankful they are not unleashed to torture and kill me.
Hobbes says life is all that matters. IF that can be preserved count your blessings. But what is the point of life for the sake of life? Humans are too attached to existence. Why put up with such misery for so many thousands of years. Man truly is a detestable wretch.
To use the Freudian scheme. The id is the raw pleasure instinct. The ego is a rational homoeconomicus calculating the numbers to satisfy the id, a pure pragmatist. And the superego is the highest level of abstraction of the morality of society. I’m basically all superego. Which ironically has sent me into far more conflict with society than the pure id would.
I accept a post-modernist theory of epistemology that whatever power says is true is true. The dominant ideology of our age is the sociobiolgoical human nature theory has established by EO Wilson, Dawkins, Matt Ridley, Pinkard etc. Now I don’t know if the science behind it is true. I only accept it because it is in power. Ironically the reason I accept dominant truth is because I’ve come to understand in a Hegelian way that everything is in flux. That negation both destroys and conserves. And so the civilizations of the past the great Greek, Roman, Mongol, Calvinist republics, naturally gave rise to the world we live in today. But sociobiology has a hard time explaining change. Well thats not entirely true.
EO Wilson’s Consilience is a textbook on the elements of Americanism. It starts with the basic laws of physics, goes onto chemistry, and explains biology as the survival of the selfish-gene. The survival of the highest levels of culture through the meme, is in fact simply a more complex version of the elementary laws of physics. On the other-hand I don’t think anything new is added to the social sciences byDual Inheritance Theory (DIT), also known as Gene-Culture Coevolution. IT doesn’t really explain anything except in a Freudian way to suggest that everything is really about sexual selection.
So I think the more complex theory of historical change as proposed by Georg Hegel is perfectly compatible with DIT, precisely because DIT is so vague. Hegel’s Philosophy of History can be seen as the way in which the historical and memetic process evolved. Dawkins himself admits that Lamarckism is applicable to memetics in a way it is not to genetics. The gene-meme analogy, also helps to explain Hegel’s negation of the negation. Sublation both conserves and destroys. That is what genetic replication does. So you could say that Athenian democracy, Calvinist Puritanism, Roman Republican civic virtue, are recessive genes still carried in our culture.
Does social science mean advocating Pinkard’s blank slate strawman? An infinitely malleable human nature? Not necessarily. Hegel does not have any romantic state of nature. So the starting point for Hegel, is very much the alpha male brute with his rape-slaves, and the beta-male slaves. This is the time in which the more r traits of humanity are dominant. OF course everything is relative. The caveman is still the most K selective of any species up to his time. The historical direction of both cultural and biological evolution has been towards the K traits. K selection strategy is basically a laundry list of the virtues of Christianity, Stoicism, Confucianism, Republicanism etc. So without denying human nature, the historical trend in evolution has been towards creating more and more helpless babies, that need longer and longer care to survive and thus become less and less genetically determined and more and more memetically determined.
Well if history is such a great theodicy, and this is the best of all possible worlds, why do we still live in a world where Roissy and Tucker Max can enjoy the good-life? Where our memetic evolution seems to champion the virtues of that life? Where the individuals duty as a historically placed citizen seems to be to embrace the PUA lifestyle pop culture and thus the historical age demands? Could this be a case of the Hegelian cunning of reason? In which the Meme uses evil as the means to which good can triumph? It is an era of contradiction. Never has information capital been so valuable and yet the K-selection which champions this seems weak memetically, although not necessarily genetically. In a great turnabout the alphas have captured the meme, while the betas have captured the gene. Alphas (r), as Roissy himself points out in his warnings about marriage and child support, have never been LESS genetically successful. Since it is a zero-sum game, even if betas (K) are less successful absolutely, they have never enjoyed a greater relative advantage. This is taking the bird’s eyeview. From the worm in the soil, it can seem like the Roissys of the world have all the fun. In this sense Tucker Max is no more evil than an Oyster that fertilizes 100 million eggs, without being caring is. So perhaps my feeling of repulsion in the gut to r strategy is just the result of millions of years of K evolution.
But to be Kierkegarrdian about this, what does that good news mean for me as an historical individual? Its simply putting in new terms the old Enlightenment idea of progress. That every new age is the best of all previous ages. Certainly in areas like technology thats true. And if it is all about cruelty and suffering, there is nothing that brings more of that than the wars your civic-citizens are so heroic in. This is certainly one of the most peaceful ages in history. And much of the third world has put that stability to good use in raising billions out of grinding poverty. But I’m being a tad too Hegelian again, and still not asking what it means for me getting a job.
In a world where its just about means for everyone else, I really care about ultimate ends. Although it wasn’t always that way. My ideas evolved from very concrete individual situations, which in turn became abstracted. And those abstract ideas became more powerful than the concrete world that gave birth to them. This had a negative result because it led to me becoming so miserable I could do nothing to serve those abstract ideas.
I’m not an individualist, and I’m not a pluralist. I’m a monist. Only one meme can dominate an age. And it is our duty to serve the dominant meme of our age. Pop culture is the means by which 2010 USA creates the ethical imperatives for its’ citizens. In that sense I can not simply go my own way, live and let live. That kind of makes this discussion meaningless. No matter how much semantics we use to show this age really isn’t all that bad, the ultimate Hegelian conclusion must be for me to embrace the Zeitgeist. And I just don’t think that’s something I can be talked into.
Lauren visited the Wendy Williams Show today February 4th, continuing along on her Sweet promotional duties. Out in the New York cold we’re being treated to Lauren’s East Coast wintry look which includes an assortment of coats and scarves.
The single best aspect of the Wendy Williams Show is when Wendy has her guest recite the line that’s made her so famous, “How YOU Doing?” Seeing Paris Hilton do it a while back made our day, and we can only hope Lauren will play along.
We will find out when the show airs later this month.
It’s only fair to talk about another awards ceremony at this time of year, one which has managed to maintain its staunch anti-commercial stance and has never sacrificed its history to allow higher-grossing films into its top categories. This is partly because the films which tend to get given Razzies are often seen by millions of foolish people, a pattern which dictates future movie release schedules and therefore repeats the feat, making more bad movies which more people see and therefore perpetuating the need for the Razzies.
This year’s bunch, in full here, are particularly righteous, with Land of the Lost and Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen leading the ignominious. So, a few bulleted thoughts on the nominations:
Sandra Bullock ‘does and Eddie Murphy’ and gets nods for Best Actress at both The Oscars and The Razzies. She gets it here for All About Steve, a film which I have not seen but is purportedly so awful as to have made some member of the MOD’s extended family spew expletives beyond the recognition of well-bred English-speaking people. Whether this nod will hurt her chances for winning for The Blind Side, as I would suggest Norbit did for Murphy when he got his Dreamgirls nod, remains to be seen.
Nice barbed stab at The Jonas Brothers as Worst Actors. A band which appears to be attempting to disseminate abstinence-only teachings to your children, a tactic which will only end in massive number of underage pregnancies amongst fans of the stupifyingly pointless band, deserve to be kicked, beaten and knocked down at every possible point.
Shia LeBoeuf and Megan Fox for Worst Couple is perfect. The entire pair of those films looks as though he is frightened to touch her for fear of having his hands smeared in sweat-ravaged fake tan or the germs of other men. Her nod for worst actress though perhaps should be paired with her comically inept performance in Jennifer’s Body, in which she mistakes ’sexy’ for ‘late-80s New York hooker’.
Also, praise to the board for the dumps taken on Hugh Hefner, Billy Ray Cyrus, Miley Cyrus and Steve Martin, on of whom can do better and the rest of which should be consigned to a dumpster to live in shame.
As it’s the end of the decade, they’ve also released their nominations for Film, Actor and Actress of the Decade, worst that is. My predictions and views are below.
Picture: I think Battlefield Earth may have to take it on this one, though the competition is tough. I Know Who Killed Me probably didn’t offend enough people to take the prize, but Gigli is a worthy challenger. Freddy Got Fingered probably has too many dumb revisionist cult movie fans to win this one.
Actor: Travolta and Murphy will battle it out for Worst Actor. The nod for Myers is absolutely right, especially after he attempted to shit on Inglourious Basterds this year, as if he had yet to destroy enough over the past ten years. Affleck been okay in some stuff so doesn’t really deserve it and Rob Schneider, everyone just wants to forget about Rob Schneider.
Actress: For Worst Actress, Madonna has always been terrible but she may not have done enough to earn the title. Lohan has Mean Girls to prevent her dropping in to the race. Gigli places Lopez in a strong position to win while Carey has had Precious to redeem her a little. So it has to be Hilton, an STD which has blighted cinema for ten years now and should be deservedly eviscerated.
Socialite Paris Hilton is considering marrying beau Doug Reinhardt, who has struck the right chords with her parents.
| View Show | Create Your Own
Last summer when my hair was bleach blonde, I went to my first NYC Gay Bar somewhere in Midtown with two of my favorite Pi Phi girls. Drawn to this location by the allure of open bar until 11 p.m, I hastily handed the bouncer my I.D. Before checking my age and letting me into the bar, he immediately said that the flip flops I’d worn out of the inevitably of walking in NY were unacceptable. He proceeded to let me in anyway.
Gossip Center/SplashNews