Green Room

Maybe we should define “progress”

posted at 11:59 am on February 10, 2013 by

Suzi Parker at the Washington Post seems worried that the new dress code from CBS for Grammy Awards attendees is a sign of regression:

Is this country regressing instead of progressing?

The war on women is raging, feminism is a dirty word and skimpy clothes on stars is a no-no, even in the world of rock and roll.

Tonight, CBS hosts the 55th annual Grammy Awards where music royalty gather to honor talent in an array of  genres including jazz, country, rock and even classical. It’s a starry, sparkly event, the music business’ equivalent to the Academy Awards, where musicians strut on the red carpet in outrageous outfits.

But maybe not this year.

CBS has issued a “wardrobe advisory” for tonight’s show. It reportedly states, “Please be sure that buttocks and female breasts are adequately covered. Thong type costumes are problematic. Please avoid exposing bare fleshy under curves of the buttocks and buttock crack. Bare sides or under curvature of the breasts is also problematic.”

See-through clothing that could “possibly expose female breast nipples” is also banned. And then there’s this: “Please be sure the genital region is adequately covered so that there is no visible ‘puffy’ bare skin exposure.” As if any worthy rock star has an ounce of puffy anywhere on his or her body.

The “war on women” is a myth, feminism sold out during the Monica Lewinsky affair, and skimpy clothes are fine on the beach or in similar social circumstances.  If we’re defining progress by how acceptable it is at formal affairs to expose nipples and show off “side boob,” then I’d say that we’re regressing as a society to on that basis rather than progressing toward maturity.

I find it rather amazing that the Washington Post can decry the decline of feminism and in the same sentence complain that CBS wants to avoid having women displayed as sexual objects with their breasts and buttocks on display for entertainment.  Talk about clueless irony ….

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Glad they have their priorities in order: No side views of boobs, no stories on Benghazi, et al

Amendment X on February 10, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Please be sure that buttocks and female breasts are adequately covered.

So, what, moobs are OK?

I’m confused.

iurockhead on February 10, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Not that I would watch the Grammies but I’m afraid this policy will spill over to other shows. I always justified my cable bill as being part “cover charge”.

you know I’m just joking.

teejk on February 10, 2013 at 12:17 PM

So WaPo is offended that awards shows aren’t giant porn flicks? Er, ooooookkaaaayyyy…

Stoic Patriot on February 10, 2013 at 1:53 PM

“Progress means getting nearer to the place you want to be. And if you have taken a wrong turning, then to go forward does not get you any nearer.
If you are on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; and in that case the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive man.”

C.S. Lewis

FlareCorran on February 10, 2013 at 2:02 PM

Why bother watching if we can’t see a nip slip?????

redguy on February 10, 2013 at 2:25 PM

Before you can define “progress”, you must FIRST define “normal”.

The entire spectrum of ALL political debate boils down to an argument over “defining normal.”

Conclusion:

There’s never going to be an agreement over the definition of “normal” or “progress”, until Jesus returns.

Period.

listens2glenn on February 10, 2013 at 2:33 PM

I’m really glad to see someone call out the feminist. They’re the ones who allowed this “War on Women” to be run by the Democrats, they’re the ones who had no problem with Clinton and Lewinsky, and they’re the ones who only have problems with bias when they can blame it on Conservatives.

Having raised 3 daughters, I never realized I should have told them to only complain about unfair treatment if it was from a Republican and let the Democrats do what they want.

bflat879 on February 10, 2013 at 4:51 PM

where music royalty gather to honor talent

See, there’s our first problem. No, they aren’t royalty. I know many folks might speak hyperbolically about that, but I somehow doubt it was hyperbolic from this woman.

GWB on February 11, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Obama thinks that taxing you and using the tax money to hire people to work for the government is job creation. Real job creation occurs when people start their own businesses and grow and hire more employees thereby increasing the tax base. Everyone wins. The employer gets rewarded for his investment of time and money, the employee gets a job and the govenrment gets more tax money due to the increased tax base. Socialist fools like Obama do not understand this simple truth and the country suffers because of it. Obama is alot more interested in his perverse socialist agenda that he is in the welfare his fellow citizens

kemojr on February 11, 2013 at 9:43 AM

I thought we had dictionaries around that would help with that..even online ones, Suzi.

OH, like “focus” when Obama uses it….yeah…

Inigo Montoya on Obama’s use of the word “focus”

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

ProfShadow on February 11, 2013 at 12:49 PM

I find it rather amazing that the Washington Post can decry the decline of feminism and in the same sentence complain that CBS wants to avoid having women displayed as sexual objects with their breasts and buttocks on display for entertainment. Talk about clueless irony ….

It’s not contradictory to the liberal feminists mind because they want a society where they are free to “be themselves” and act in any way they want without anyone judging them for it. They want to behave like sexual objects but blame you if you think they are a sexual object.

gwelf on February 11, 2013 at 1:55 PM