Mediaboss Marketing

A A

Esther Cepeda is a columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group. Email: estherjcepeda@washpost.com.

As someone who shuns celebrity news, gossip and whatever is breaking the internet on a given day, Anne Helen Petersons new book, Too Fat, Too Slutty, Too Loud: The Rise and Reign of the Unruly Woman, was not a natural fit for me.

But as a rich reality-TV star tweets policy from the White House, it seems warranted to consider celebrity as a lens through which to try to understand our current political moment.

By this logic, its worth taking stock of female archetypes through the stories of some of the most talked-about women of the last few years and Peterson does so in near scholarly detail.

Her selection of so-called unruly women is notable and engaging for its seeming randomness.

Petersons mix of profiles includes those who have been around so long Serena Williams, Madonna and Hillary Clinton that at first they seem unlikely to provide any new insight into the cultural moment. And then there are those, like Lena Dunham, Caitlyn Jenner and Kim Kardashian, who you may already be sick and tired of hearing about. But dig in and youll be treated to myriad aspects of famous women that you may never have considered.

For instance, you might have thought that the tennis champion Williams was strictly a success story. But Peterson digs deep into the racial abuse and sexual snark that have followed Williams as she broke the mold of the traditional tennis ideal of understated, moneyed elegance that corresponds with upper-class America.

Similarly, in Petersons investigation of rapper Nicki Minaj, readers are shown that beyond the tabloid frenzy surrounding her overtly sexual branding we find a woman who defines herself by her business acumen. She prides herself on her hard work, has found a way to play by her own rules in a music industry dominated by men, and calls out women who tear other women down.

Describing an interview in which a female reporter, referring to an incident between some of the men in Minajs orbit, asked the rapper whether she thrived on drama, Peterson quotes Minaj: Thats the typical thing that women do. What did you putting me down right there do for you? Women blame women for things that have nothing to do with them. To put down a woman for something that men do, as if theyre children and Im responsible, has nothing to do with you asking stupid questions, but you know thats not just a stupid question. Thats a premeditated thing you just did.

It was a relief to see at least one strong criticism of a culture in which female journalists and consumers lead the charge in the judgment about whether a female celebrity is too fat (actress Melissa McCarthy), too gross (actresses Abbi Jacobson and Ilana Glazer) or too loud (novelist Jennifer Weiner).

Peterson has written an intelligent and fascinating book that prompts us to make connections and subsequently allows us to reconsider how we judge women in the public eye.

Because I tend to ignore anything Kardashian related, I had been unaware of the connection between the social media-fueled images of maternity and childbirth perfection and the health crises that plagued Kim Kardashians high-risk pregnancies.

Similarly, Petersons chapter on Jenners transition and the ways in which it is not emblematic of an everyday persons financial, emotional and societal struggles in being transgender is a mini-masterpiece of LGBTQ history.

I enjoyed reading Petersons study of unruly women, but I have to say its too bad that no Asian-American or Hispanic women made it into her book. As a result, it feels like they were lumped together in a category marked Too Invisible or Too Marginalized and, surely, this cant be.

From Tiger Moms (Amy Chua) to the first female Doctor Watson (Lucy Liu) and any number of controversial or beloved Hispanic celebrities (Sofia Vergara and Selena Quintanilla spring to mind), unruly women come in all races and ethnicities.

Follow this link:
Cepeda: 'Unruly' women bring culture wars into sharp focus - The Columbian

Subscribe to Loudwire on

Its time for another new episode of Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction?. This time around, we sat down with Bad Religion vocalist Greg Graffin to prove and disprove whats written about him on Wikipedia.

If you love your Wiki episodes completely loaded with fiction, this ones for you, and after all, whats stranger than fiction? Dr. Graffin corrected plenty of misinformation during this segment, starting with his birthplace and putting a contradiction to bed about whether his PhD was earned in Zoology or Evolutionary Biology. As a college science professor in the fall semester, we also got the scoop on whether or not Bad Religion fans flock to take his course.

On Bad Religions Wikipedia page for The Gray Race, it says the album was their first since How Could Hell Be Any Worse? that the band recorded together as a group and the first that Graffin actually solicited the opinions of his bandmates before recording. Graffin was quick to slap this claim down, assuring us that Bad Religion has always been a democracy. [There are] parts of [this] that seem propagandist, Graffin says about the Wikipedia entry. We always record as a group. If the band [members] hate a song, they dont have to play on it. That makes it sound like it was an autocracy.

One of Graffins funniest responses came with a Wiki entry stating Bad Religions opening slot on Blink-182s 2000 U.S. tour unfortunately may not have been what Graffin and the boys were hoping for. Unfortunately, the band was hoping for greater things, like perhaps to be as famous as Blink-182, Graffin responds sarcastically. In reality, Graffin has nothing but positive memories of the tour and was thankful to play for large crowds that may have not yet experienced the music of Bad Religion.

Check out one of most entertaining Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction? videos to date in the clip above! Also, make sure to grab a copy of Greg Graffins new solo album, Millport, which sees the musician embrace his folk and American roots music side.

Joey Jordison Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction?

Subscribe to Loudwire on

Jason Newsted Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction?

Subscribe to Loudwire on

Read more:
Bad Religion's Greg Graffin Plays 'Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction?' - Loudwire

Asked by Charlie Rose (at the 15:30 mark) should they take down the Jefferson Memorial? Al Sharptonreflected on the nature of slavery then answered a different question: whether the federal government should support the memorial. Sharpton said it should not. When you look at the fact thatpublic monuments are supported by public funds youre asking me to subsidize the insult of my family. I would repeat that the public should not be paying to uphold somebody who has had that kind of background. You have private museums, you have other things that you may want to do there.

The Jefferson Memorial obviously cant be placed in a museum. Im not sure how privatizing it would work but I doubt the protesters whoare surely coming to it will much worry about that detail.

Sharpton also said(at the 11:55 mark),in the course of criticizing President Trumps reaction to Charlottesville,Ivein my own career wrestled, youve got to deal openly and say, no, Im not gonna be with those elements, Im not going to deal with violence. Ive had to deal with that.Im not saying anything that a lot of public officials havent had to struggle with, which is why Im saying, he knows better. Every one of us knows when youre around extremists that you need to say, Wait a minute, Im going topart company.

After Sharptonplayed a key role in the 1991 riots in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, ittook him 20 years to issue what The Forward called the closest he will probably ever come to an apology (our language and tone sometimes exacerbated tensions and played to the extremists) though heclaimed he saw brick-throwing on all sidesduring the unrest, which he helped instigate. Aftera black youth was accidentally killed by a car driven by a Jew, Sharptonsaid these words at a service for the deceased: Talk about howOppenheimerinSouth Africasends diamonds straight toTel Avivand deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. . . . All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no coffee klatsch, no skinnin and grinnin. A mob responded by murdering a rabbinical student and rioting for three days.

Sharptonin 1995 damned the Jewish owner of a sneaker store in Harlem at an angry rallybroadcast on local radioduring which he called the stores ownera white interloper and added, We are asking the buy blackcommittee to go down there, and Im going to go down there and do what is necessary to let them know that we are not turning 125th Street back over to the outsiders that was done in the early part of this century. . . .This is a sin and a shame and a disgrace, and we should not under any circumstances sit by and allow this to happen without a major reaction and major protest from us. One of the demonstrators who besieged the store shouting racist and anti-Semitic epithetslater killed seven people and himself in an arson attack on it.

Read more:
Al Sharpton Puts Jefferson Memorial on Notice - National Review

Radio host Rush Limbaugh has wry advice for activists targeting historical monuments to combat racism: Youve got to get rid of the Democrat Party.

Criticism of the Jefferson Memorial by the Rev. Al Sharpton, coupled with thetearing down of Confederate monument in North Carolina this week, prompted a race monologue by the eponymous host of The Rush Limbaugh Show on Tuesday.

The man behind the golden EIB microphone told his millions of listeners that left-wing activists cannot be mollified by ridding the nation of Civil War monuments before jokingly laying out a blueprint for success.

Their whole argument resides on the notion that it hasnt changed, that there still is, for all intents and purposes, slavery. There still is racism. There still is bigotry, Mr. Limbaughsaid in response to Mr. Sharptons appearance Monday night on PBS host Charlie Roses show.

Mr. Sharpton called the Jefferson Memorial a personal affront akin to subsidizing insults towards his family.

The Klan was all Democrats, and the segregationists in the South were all Democrats, Mr. Limbaugh responded. Id like to ask a question about this, for those of you on the left. You want to tear down the statues of Robert E. Lee and you want to tear down, now, the Jefferson Memorial if youre Al Sharpton.

But you want to get rid of all of these monuments that have been erected to people and events in our nations past, tied to the Civil War, which you find horribly, horribly offensive and you want to get rid of all vestiges. Well, at what point are you gonna realize that you also have to disband the Democrat Party? If youre gonna really succeed and follow through to the end on this mission, youve got to get rid of the Democrat Party.

The conservative hosts commentary came three days after 32-year-old Heather Heyer was killed during a clash between white supremacists and counter-protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia. Cops arrested suspect James Alex Fields, 20, after he plowed his vehicle into a crowd.

If you cleanse all of these uncomfortable and painful reminders the statues are down, the roads are renamed, all of these monuments are gone how is your life on that day made better? How is your standard of living impacted? Mr. Limbaugh continued. How is your overall degree of happiness measured?

I guarantee you they havent thought this far because thats not what any of this is about. Were dealing hip deep with an unhinged irrationality that has the full-fledged support of the American media, which remains the organizing power today that projects the power of the American and the worldwide left.

See the original post:
Limbaugh to activists targeting historical monuments: 'Get rid of the Democrat Party' - Washington Times

A comparable incident occurred just this week, when a Texas middle school fired its assistant principal, Eric Hauser, after he published a children's book featuring the "popular white nationalist symbol," Pepe the Frog.

According to The Washington Post, the school district Superintendent Jamie Wilson released a statement encouraging free-thought and open expression, but said, "When these ideas interrupt the ability to learn, work or create divisiveness each of us is held accountable."

In other words, because the assistant principal's actions impeded the mission of the institution, Superintendent Wilson had grounds to fire him. It seems, then, in both public and private spheres, employees can be held accountable for their political speech.

As Gillian B. White points out in The Atlantic, the events in Charlottesville seem to reflect a disturbing trend in which white nationalists feel increasingly at ease openly expressing themselves, regardless of potential consequences.

"The hoods may be off," she writes, "but the torchbearers may not have jobs to come back to on Monday."

Like this story? Like CNBC Make It on Facebook.

Don't Miss: Here's how to get people to listen to you when you speak

Link:
Yes, your boss can fire you for being a white supremacist - CNBC