So much do I not care about it that I would not even mention it at all were it not for the media's obsession with it.
The latest item across which I've stumbled is the unintentionally hilariously titled "Megan Fox Has Had Limited Lovers," by which the writers mean limited in number, not in prowess, despite the fact that one might reasonably expect to find beneath such a headline an article about all the men who have failed to bring Megan Fox to orgasm, say.
The article is a perfect example of the tone routinely engaged to discuss Fox's sex life, or lack thereof:
The 'Transformers' actress, who is regarded as one of the world's sexiest women, insists she has only been intimate with long-term partner Brian Austin Green and her first boyfriend as she can only have sex with people she loves.Translation: "Megan Fox, who is SUPERHOT, dubiously claims to not be a TOTES SLUT.
Megan, who has previously claimed she is bisexual, insists she is nothing like her sex siren image and is happy living a quiet life with former 'Beverly Hills 90210' star Brian and his eight-year-old son, Kassius.Translation: "Megan Fox, who is SUPERHOT, dubiously claims to not be a TOTES SLUT.
The construction is always the same.
And what I find most interesting about it is that Fox is essentially navigating the exact balance that our cultural narratives suggest we expect of our ingenues: Be a willing sex object, but don't be a slut. And since she can neither be dismissed as a prude or viciously slut-shamed, she is instead called a liar.
Can't win. Can't fucking win.
[Recommended Reading: Sady's great piece "Megan Fox: Sex Symbol, Mouthy Slut, Or Something Else Entirely?"]
Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus