Vacation house & feminism.

I'm going to my vacation house today after school. Thank god. I'm so sick of this town, this house, this school. I miss D, and I miss the chilly, crisp air that brings me such relief. I miss lying down on the lake's shore, the sun beating down on my browned legs, listening to the waves smack and recess against the dock. I miss the summer. No, I miss last summer. The summer before this past one. It was so much more fun, so much more laid back. Summery. It was the summer after everything died down, the summer that made me think things will finally be okay. It was the summer I met D, Z, K. It was the last summer that I spent thinking like a child.

I don't really care so much about acting like a child, as opposed to acting like an adult; in my experienced opinion, either are acceptable in society. Look at the celebrities in the news today. Thirty-year-old mothers are running around, partying like they're in their early twenties. And yet, we still call them our role models. "They live how they want! They're doing so much for the environment! Who cares about their three kids! That's what live-in nannies are for!"

It bothers me and scares me how deeply in love our society has fallen with stupidity and selfishness. What has happened to compassion, to self-confidence, to the power of simplicity? 

What happened to good-old feminism? What happened to the glorification of women's sexuality? Why do women fight to survive in a man's world by making themselves more aggressive, more power-driven? I just read an article that explained perfectly what I'm trying to say. Check it out, it's a really well-written explanation of feminism in the media. 

Why does the widely-popular, fashion magazine Vogue advertise itself as a feminist magazine? I've always been so confused by this. Yes, as a whole, it does glorify women and their sexuality in a way that doesn't make all feminists look like bra-burning radicals. But look at the ads that Vogue publishes. In general, we have skipped from one extreme to the other: the first being the belief that tiny-waisted, big-chested, blonde women are the perfect example to aspire to be. If those ads aren't the epitome of sexism, I don't know what is. Basically, what the ad with the skinny, beautiful, clear-skinned, long-haired, small-waisted, small-chested, big-eyed model is telling you is, "In order to be beautiful, you must first look like this." Outward beauty is the product of an inner glow. 

Personally, I think that the argument most designers use ("My garments look better on thin models") is complete BS. Close to no one is as thin as the model wearing that Versace gown, or can afford it; since nearly none of us look like that model, how are we supposed to buy it? If what it looks like in the ad was the main spur to try it on, and it doesn't look like it does in print, then how does this marketing tactic work?... I understand that the idea of high fashion and cutoure is that the garments aren't really wearable anyway, but still. What should a ten-year-old think when she watches the beautiful (yet really really puffy) evening gown parade itself down the runway, worn by a thinner-than-is-healthy model?