.jpg)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
[Editor's note: As you might know, I have a boyfriend, and he has Opinions on
Things, including what I wear on my nails. I gave him 8 of my favourite green polishes to review. This is
the result.
Macro shots by me, the bottle shots are by him.]
Pen and paper, AND a computer? You spoil us, good sir.
As Michelle is busy trying to finish her thesis, she gave me a selection of 8 different nail polishes to review. The overriding theme of these nail polishes is seemingly green and sparkles. One of the first things I noticed about the collection was that some of them were called nail polish, whilst others were dubbed nail enamel, or nail lacquers, or nail colours. At first I thought this meant they were different, or might have a different purpose, but I was corrected by Michelle. They are all, in fact, just nail polish.
Being a man I was hesitant to put all this sparkly shit on my nails, so below are my thoughts on the colours and packaging of the following polishes.
Cult Nails - I Got Distracted
This one is kind of black with a few different sizes of greenish and silverish/goldish sparkles. Before I go any further I should get something out of the way. I think sparkles look tacky. Sparkles are to nail polish what gold paint is to jewellery. Most men do not get excited by sparkly things, the ones who do are fairies. Men cannot tell the difference between “big” and “small” sparkles, between “glitters” and “shimmers” or whatever other names they may come by, all we see is tacky sparkles. The only thing worse, is rainbow sparkles, or a number of different coloured sparkles in the one polish. They just make it look dirty. You may as well pour dirt or sand in your nail polish. When Leonardo da Vinci painted The Mona Lisa he didn’t use sparkles, because it would have made it shit. It’s not that different with nails. The reason they invented sparkly nail polish is because they ran out of colours to make. By adding sparkles there is now an infinite number of colour and sparkle combinations for them to sell. Don’t buy into their corporate greed. Their only positive feature, I suppose, is that they are easier to make at home from other polishes and glitters. I’m sorry but it seems I got distracted. As far as this nail polish is concerned, it’s redeemed slightly by the fact that they started with black. It’s not completely horrible.
AR - Reptar
When I hear Reptar, I think of the cool green dragon thing from Rugrats [Ed: Not a dragon.]. When I look at this nail polish, I think of the sour cream in my fridge that’s going mouldy, and has bits of chilli sauce in it. If it didn’t have all the different colours of sparkles it would be quite a respectable polish. There’s just too much going on in there.
[Ed: He liked it when I wore it, and said it was nice because it was a bit different. The boyfriend has no memory. Also AR = Alanna Renee - he seemingly doesn't have much in the way of eyesight, either...]
Orly - Coachella Dweller
I like this one. Kind of makes me think of guacamole. In fact, I’m not completely sure this isn’t actually guacamole. Whilst I’m not a huge fan of avocado, I do like guacamole on Mexican food, so I do think pretty highly of it. I’m pretty sure the name of the polish has nothing to do with the colour, which I don’t like. In fact I just came up with a better name - Guacamole Green. I don’t know if there’s a person assigned the task of coming up with nail polish names, but if there is they should be fired, and they should pay me to do it instead.
Gloss 'n Sparkle - Goblins Grave
This is my least disliked out of all the sparkly ones. Possibly because it has the least number of different coloured sparkles. This one is all green/blue with different greenish/blue sparkles. I’m not sure I think of sparkles when I think of goblins but I do think of green, so I’ll give it a few points. They also call it a nail polish. I like it when people call a spade a spade.
Nubar - Greenish sparkles
[Ed: It's Reclaim. He though "Reclaim" on the bottom was so you knew what code to use when you recycled the bottle.]
Not sure what this one was supposed to be called. The closest thing I could find to a name was formaldehyde, phthalate, and toluene free. Michelle says this one has a rainbow shimmer. I don’t see rainbows, and if I did, I would like it less. I’d say it’s an inconsistent green. It’s like there are sparkles in there, but they are concerned about their weight and are covering up, and there’s a rainbow in there, but it won’t come out of the closet. It’s something I can’t put my finger on, and as such I don’t really like it.
L’Oreal - Majestic Green
This was only nail polish to have a name which might suggest what colour it is, and they got it wrong. This is most certainly not green. If I had to call it a colour it would be gold, but it’s not your average gold, they’ve taken gold and made it sparkly, which makes it look kind of brown. Imagine a child that ate a curry then vomited it back up. In fact, it looks just like the turmeric and coconut chicken curry we used to get from the Thai restaurant up the road from uni. Not so majestic. Also it’s the smallest of the lot, and I’m guessing it’s not a cheap one. This was my least favourite.
Emily de Molly - Majestic Flight
Too gay.
[Ed: Every time we go into a clothing store, he makes a beeline for whatever item most resembles a rainbow. Every. Time. And 90% of the time we leave with it. Here are some of his clothes:
Pot/kettle.]
BYS - Fatal Attraction
This is the best one by far. It’s bold, it’s simple, it’s clean, and it’s not pretentious. Plus, IT DOESN’T HAVE SPARKLES! Also it’s a colour that I like. I would wear this one myself.
Trent is a first-time blogger who likes skydiving and rock climbing and other manly things. He hates sparkles.
Hilarious post - loved it! He should write more!
ReplyDeleteI'm sure he wants to spread his opinions more, but is that too dangerous? :\
DeleteWhen is Trent starting his own blog?? I loved reading this. More man perspective please x
ReplyDeleteI think I can cajole him into writing more! :)
DeletePlease do! :-*
Deletei LOVED to read it,great post! :D
ReplyDeleteToo funny!
ReplyDeleteSurprised he didn't call the BYS one "Xbox 360 green". Maybe that's part of the reason he liked it?
It's the same colour as his new parachute :) I have noticed that a lot of products geared towards men are green though! Must be market research-based.
DeleteI would definitely buy Guacamole Green nail polish.
ReplyDeleteThis is absolutely hilarious! Please make this a regular feature! :D
ReplyDeleteFunniest post ever! Please make him do it more often!
ReplyDeleteLOVE the typical Aussie shirtless photo and the typical male reponses. Aren't our men FAB?
ReplyDeleteIf only we could see things in black and white like that! :)
DeleteThis was by far the funniest blog post I've ever read!
ReplyDeleteNew fan here. OMG I loved this!! It had me cracking up lol Thanks for the post :)
ReplyDeleteI think you may have found an equivalent to Muffin Monday!!!! This shit is hilarious and has all rainbow sparkles that are hiding in the closet!
ReplyDeleteI don't think I have ever laughed so much at a post you should definitaly get him to do more i love the bit at the end were you said about him liking manly things and hating sparkles ahaha xxx
ReplyDeleteHahaha, this is hilarious.
ReplyDeleteI love this post! I had a good laugh while reading this (at work) and he's right. I don't like sparkles either, they make pokish look completely tacky and I try and steer away from them. I like to hear a guys opinion because they say it as it is, there's no grey matter, it's black or white. He'll have to do more reviews during your busy times again :) by far the best post I've read in a while, thanks Trent and Michelle. PS good luck on the thesis.
ReplyDeleteThanks! It's so close to finished now :)
Delete"sparkly shit" - I love you, boy!
ReplyDeletethis made me laugh :D it's cool to have different perspective even when it includes hating sparkles
ReplyDeleteIt's nice to read, but when he goes through my Helmer and tries to get rid of everything but the cremes, that's a different story! :(
Deleteoh that's evil, hide away the glitters, save them :D
DeleteThis was hilarious! Your boyfriend should guest post monthly just to make us girls laugh.
ReplyDeleteHe's considering it, I think he likes forcing people other than me to listen to his opinions!
Deletehahah this was hysterical! i need to convince my boyfriend to do this!
ReplyDeleteDo it! :)
DeleteThis made my day! Sooo funny. I loved the food references, that goes straight to my heart hahah!
ReplyDeleteHaha, me too! Food = <3
DeleteThis was brilliant. Loved every word. He wrote what my husband thinks when he looks at my makeup collection. They don't seem to understand the subtle differences between the 50 different pink lipsticks that I have or the endless eyeshadow palettes. :-)
ReplyDeleteHaha! He tried to convince me that all my taupes were the same by making me name what was on each swatch stick with the names covered up... I won, of course :) Not dupes!
DeleteUtterly fricking hillarz. ^_^
ReplyDeleteThank you thank you thank you! This was one of the most entertaining post I've read in a long time! Too funny! He needs to do some more reviews! :)
ReplyDeleteAhahaha! This was amazing! Especially giggling over his description of Reclaim and you adding the photos of his favorite rainbow clothes :D
ReplyDeleteMORE Trent!!!! He already has groupies.
ReplyDelete"When Loeonardo Da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa he didn't use sparkles because that would have made it shit."
ReplyDeleteToo bloody funny!
Regular feature, please!
That was thoroughly amusing. I really liked his analogy of nail polish with the Mona Lisa!!
ReplyDeleteClassic Trent...
ReplyDeleteHaha yep.
DeleteOh my gosh, that was hilarious. I'm grinning like an idiot.
ReplyDeleteGlad you liked it! :)
DeleteThis post is pretty adorable. :)
ReplyDeleteSparkles = Shit. Guy nail polish mentality cracks me up. My poor husband gets to be bothered by me on a daily basis about my nail polish. I don't think he cares much, but to his credit he comes up with nice things to say most of the time. Nice post. Made me laugh.
ReplyDeleteI show mine nail art, but if I have an indie on, it's just "Oh. Sparkle's." *look of derision*
DeleteToo funny, if only us girls knew that sparkles were a turn off would we still wear them? I think yes we would!
ReplyDeleteI wish I could get my man to blog for me :)
Definitely! What men don't realise is that women mainly wear makeup for other women - most men are too oblivious to notice!
Delete(and for ourselves of course!)
DeleteGotta love it when the men talk polish...its always hilarious!!
ReplyDeleteTrying to explain dupes... Gah!
DeleteThis is funny beyond words! MORE MORE MORE!
ReplyDeleteThere will be, I got him to agree :) Not in writing though unfortunately!
DeleteOh this was hilarious xD
ReplyDeleteMore please?
Soon! :)
Deleteahahahaha omg this is amazing!
ReplyDeleteGlad you enjoyed it! :)
DeleteThis is one of the best blog posts I've read in a long time, way too hilarious. You have to get Trent to feature on here more often, love it!
ReplyDeleteI think I can convince him ;)
DeleteWhy is it funny to use the word "fairies" ?
ReplyDeleteKind of insecure for such a deep intellect, eh?
What a shame.
Ruined this blog for me.
My thoughts exactly. That, and "gay" with a negative connotation.
Delete100% agree.
DeleteThank you Anonymous x 4 for having an opinion that you're proud to put your name to :)
DeleteI have very strong feelings on the use of stereotypes in humour, and I usually don't bother responding to what seems likely to be a troll attempt, but I like getting my soapbox on sometimes, and I love being baited (damn!) so you're in luck!
Humour is subjective. I'm assuming you're not the type of person (people? more likely person) who wouldn't find Margaret Cho funny, so there isn't much point in explaining humour. But there are far better things in the world to be offended by than the word "fairy", given that it doesn't unequivocally refer to a marginalised group in society who possess characteristics they were born with and can't change. "Blonde moment", for instance would be far more offensive. Or "old age", when referring to a moment of dottiness.
I also don't see the negative connotation, except perhaps if you're rigidly conditioned to think the word "gay" is always used negatively. There exist certain things that are undeniably "gay", as in homosexual. Men checking out each other's naked butts is pretty gay. Intercourse with other men is gay. Calling yourself a "leather daddy" is, undeniably, gay. I don't think it's that far a stretch to imagine that homosexual men would be more likely to appreciate glittery nail polish. Perhaps your experience is different.
I'm not one of the Anons above, but I was also put off by what appears as casual homophobia. To my eye, he seemed to be suggesting that he doesn't like sparkles because he considers them gay. The negative connotation, therefore, is that things that are gay (or, strictly speaking, stereotypically gay) are, by definition, undesirable to him. If there is nothing negative about how he used the term gay (much less fairy, which is a slur in my part of the world), why was he using it as an explanation for why he didn't like something? To my mind, something being associated with gayness is not, in itself, a sufficient reason not to like it.
DeleteMoreover, there is nothing inherently homosexual about "sparkly things"; men checking each other out and gay leather subcultures are inseparable from homosexuality whereas glitter is, in no way, fundamentally related to being gay. At best, glitter is associated with a stereotypical view of homosexuality: one that imagines "gayness" an unsuccessful parody of traditional femininity that should be ardently avoided by heterosexual men. Whether intended for not, therefore, his comments reinforced a narrative which uses gayness as shorthand for unsuccessful (i.e. tacky, over the top) femininity.
I'm not trying to make an attack, but I am a bit of a pedant (PhD student myself) and this is an area I have a lot of thoughts about as well! I am not the type who is easily offended, but I think there is a big difference between humor that makes light of and even subverts stereotypes (like Margaret Cho) and humor that merely reinforces it. Without knowing your boyfriend well enough to understand where he is coming from and what he intends, a joke that essentially amounts to making fun of something for being gay is hard to interpret positively.
This is a good article which espouses my views better than I can: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/humor-sapiens/201107/does-racist-humor-promote-racism
DeleteSomewhat disappointed by your response, Michelle. Automatically dismissing others as trolls (and one troll, at that!), rather than taking on board that people do find such "humour" offensive and potentially damaging, as much so as rape humour and gender stereotyping. How many times has someone unleashed a doozy and defended with "Awww, can't take a joke?"
DeleteCoriander has worded it much more eloquently than I can at the moment, but I hope you can appreciate the validity of concerns that people are brave enough to raise, anon or not.
Thank you for your forthright and well-thought-out comment, coriander! :)
DeleteI respectfully disagree - if something is tailored to appeal to a group that I don't identify with, I could easily deem it as "too X" without negative intent, e.g. most pink polishes are too feminine for me, while most dark polishes are too vampy/goth. I love goth style, and I'm jealous of those who can pull it off - it just doesn't fit with my look.
Perhaps it's where I come from too, where if I see a man wearing glitter, on the balance of probabilities he's gay (this is hopefully without prejudice - I know having a black friend is no defence against racism, but the truth is, 90% of my male friends are gay). There is a strong drag subculture in Sydney, not to mention the Mardi Gras parade which is just around the corner. In my opinion, many gay men ardently embrace traditionally feminine vanity (glitter, cosmetics, general grooming) as a kind of liberation from traditional heteronormative expectations. (I do have a particularly skewed sample though, since most gay men I hang out with on a regular basis are pole dancers.)
I competely agree that context is very important in humour! I actually posted the above link to the Psychology Today article before reading your comment :) But I'm also very opposed to the knee-jerk reaction that all humour (tbh, I'm pretty sure it wasn't meant to be a joke, but his honest assessment of that polish) which can be seen as pejorative should be condemned - I don't see how censorship is going to help an issue which in my opinion is, at its crux, a massive communication problem.
Ev - I always assume Anonymous negative comments come from trolls, especially when a large number appear at once - I find that encourages people to put their names to things, so we can have a conversation like mature people :)
DeleteI believe there are two levels to pejorative humour - if you believe in the negative stereotype, you're laughing at the minority group; if you don't believe in the negative stereotype, you're laughing at the absurd mental arithmetic of people who do. I personally think there's enough context here to tell which situation applies, and if you don't, and you think I would date someone homophobic (except in the sense that everyone hopes to avoid the awkward situation where someone of a gender you're inherently not interested in has a crush on you), then it makes me sad.
But yes, I guess I assumed that people reading this would know me well enough to have an adequate context, and perhaps they don't - in which case, public service announcement: The boy and I are not homophobic in the slightest, except in the sense that he has been the subject of unrequited crushes in the past which turned mega-awkward, and we do not want that to happen again because we ended up losing a really good close friend.
DeleteI was directed here by a friend who blogs because she knows I have strong opinions on stereotyping and the slurs that come with it.
DeleteFor every article that opinionates that ‘stereotype’ jokes are fine and dandy, there’s another that says it’s damaging, so I wouldn’t put too much weight on that one article. There’s a big difference between what Margaret Cho does and a random guy who expresses his dislike for things by calling it gay or calling gay guys fairies. As you said yourself, you don’t even think your boyfriend is joking. If he’s not joking, then 'gay' is just his way of saying something sucks. You can say that’s not what he means, but unless both of you live under a rock, you should know that people do use the word ‘gay’ as a derogatory. Go to youtube and look at how many insults in the comments consist of ‘you’re gay’ or ‘that’s so gay’. So it should be no surprise at all that some people would read it exactly the way it was written.
I’m really surprised that you associate gay men to glitter, cosmetics and general grooming simply because you see it among your group of gay friends who are pole dancers. I’m surprised you don’t associate it with pole dancers in general which would seem far more logical. How many female pole dancers never use glitter or cosmetics and don’t shave or groom?
I don’t even know what you’re trying to say about homophobia and unfortunate crushes on the wrong people. What does that even have to do with homophobia I have no idea. As if as crushes on anyone who isn’t interested regardless of their sexuality isn’t just part of normal life.
I abhor stereotypes because it has been used against me far too often and the very idea that stereotyping jokes and slurs damage no one is an opinion that can only be put forward by someone who hasn’t really experienced it. I have had to grit my teeth against too many ‘girl’ jokes in my career. You can’t kick up a fuss because ‘it’s just a joke, sweetheart’. If you return with a joke at their expense, then you’re just a catty b1tch. And you know how you separate the bigots or plain ignorant idiots from the good guys? The ones who laugh and the ones who speak up against it.
Here’s a link that might be useful for you: http://themetapicture.com/expand-your-vocabulary/
To be fair, I think the difference between Margaret Cho's humour and the language used here is that Margaret Cho is known to have deep, long standing ties to the gay community. Because (to my knowledge) you haven't really spoken here about your interactions with the gay community, readers can't be expected to take his comments into context they don't have. *I* know you didn't mean any harm, and don't harbour any kind of latent homophobia, but that's because I've gotten to know you. A lot of people will just see these comments completely free of context, and in that light they look pretty bad. Just my two cents. I still think getting your boyfriend to blog is adorable.
DeleteAs I mentioned earlier, he is literally saying that in his opinion, a glittery polish is more likely to appeal to gay men than straight men, in a relatively pithy way. Yes, I can see how it's possible to interpret it in a way where "gay" = "bad", but that's not the intent (I know, because I discussed it with him before publishing this), and I think it would be nice to consider the intent before one starts throwing around accusations of homophobia in the case of an ambiguous statement, yes?
DeleteI hope you aren't seriously suggesting that if we took a survey of men who liked and disliked glitter, there wouldn't be a significantly lower proportion of heterosexual men who would self-report liking glitter. If you are suggesting this, then we clearly have no common ground here. (The pole dancer friends was a throwaway line, but if it really matters to you - yes, I have a large number of non-pole dancer gay male friends. Whee. The homophobia line too - I believe that is a legitimate reason to be a homophobe. It's the only one I've found.)
You seem to believe stereotypes are blanket bad. There is a reason the human brain likes to stereotype - they're frequently correct. It's a mental shortcut to evaluating the unknown, and the brain relies on it because it often works. You've utilised a large number yourself in your comment - stereotypes/bad, pole dancers/glitter and grooming, people who say things are "gay"/homophobes, people who enjoy stereotype-based jokes/people who haven't suffered from stereotype-based discrimination.
My point in all this is: everyone is allowed to be as offended as they want. I'm ok with that. Being offended is a gut reaction. What I'm really not ok with (and was my original point in replying to the Anon comments above), is people prescribing what others can find funny/not funny. Humour is also a gut reaction. Humour, particularly when it comes to presumably taboo subjects, depends on context and intent. I agree that stereotyping jokes can, depending on context and intent, be hurtful. In my opinion, they can also (depending on context) be really fucking funny. I strongly disagree that it's as black-and-white, bigots and idiots vs. 'good guys" as you say. Perhaps in your workplace it is. But on a beauty blog, especially one with a handy photo of an Asian female in the top left hand corner? I think there's a large amount of context that you're ignoring.
If a large number of presumably intelligent people who have some prior knowledge of the people making the joke find it funny, perhaps the easiest explanation is that you're missing part of the context? If you bothered to look further into this blog, perhaps you wouldn't see it as "a random guy".
All I know about you is from your nail polish posts. But I don’t think it really matters. You don’t have to be homophobic to perpetuate a problematic culture and to joke or stereotype in a way that just reinforces the issue.
DeleteIt’s not about censorship but all about understanding how the phrase is used and read. Do you know who thinks, ‘That’s gay’ is a great phrase? Henry Makow PhD, who is anti-homosexuality and anti-feminism. According to him, “Millions of young people say, ‘That's so gay’ to denote alien, different or unhealthy. To me, this is a hopeful sign that civilization may yet survive.” Yeah, he’s a real winner. He’s all for anything that will frame homosexuality as wrong and unnatural. The worst thing is there are people who use the phrase like that, teenagers especially.
So people might say it’s just a word or it’s just a joke or I didn’t mean it that way but they’re still basically using those words in the same way Henry Makow wants everyone to.
Yeah Cassie - I think part of the problem was my assumption that my readers know me well enough :( Hence my public service announcement above, but that doesn't seem to be working, or perhaps people are tripping over it in their scramble to opine...
DeleteJme - see 11:08 pm comment.
DeleteI wonder if you get it at all. First he said only fairies liked glitter. Then he said a nail polish was ‘too gay’ without any further description. Since you have more than one unhappy comment, I’m assuming the others thought the same thing I did. It was ‘so gay’ that he didn’t even bother to describe it like he did the other nail polishes. Gay, in this context, doesn’t sound like anything but a BAD THING, combined with his earlier remark.
DeleteTaking a survey isn’t the same as seeing glitter and thinking this is gay.
I used those stereotypes because you made references to all your gay friends, pole dancers, glitter, grooming,so on. Those are your stereotypes I was regurgitating.
I never said jokes are black or white. I just don’t believe that they are always free of consequence just because some people find it funny.
I didn’t say you’re homophobic. You’re the one who keeps bringing it up in nearly every comment. Do you realize that only coriander has alluded to ‘casual homophobia’ and everyone else is responding to your repeated mention of it? You can be wrong and stereotype all the way to the moon without being homophobic. You can offend without being homophobic.
I don’t even know where to start with this ‘legitimate reason to be a homophobe’. Are you saying that after gay guys inappropriately crushed on your straight boyfriend, it was awkward and you found it to be a reason to be a homophobe? Are you afraid and hate gay guys now because they’re gay? What if other girls did it the same to your boyfriend? I’m not even close to understanding what you mean here.
Right now, you’ve probably claimed to be homophobic more than anyone else has accused you of being one. To repeat, I HAVEN’T CALLED YOU A HOMOPHOBE.
By the way, is this supposed to turn into some debate where we win by saying how many gay friends we each have and how they behave? Cos that’s a pretty pointless way to make an argument.
The idea that stereotypes are frequently correct kills me. This thought sounds like it’s a result of that one article floating around about good stereotyping but it’s a really shallow way of understanding stereotypes, where they start, their impacts. There are so many different types that are a result of baseless misconceptions society continues to propagate. Do you really believe women can’t be leaders? Men can’t multitask? Asians are all math geniuses? It’s nice and easy for the brain to pigeonhole people, but it doesn’t make it a good thing or true. Even positive stereotypes can have bad results: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103112002211
What you’re saying in that last paragraph is that the majority went ‘haha’ so they must be right. Your reasoning is now ‘cos the majority didn’t protest’, seriously? Those who agree with you are presumably intelligent while those who disagree just don’t get it. Except even the person who presumably knows you says there isn’t any context because you haven’t posted about this before. How is anyone supposed to magically perceive context out of thin air? What does a beauty blog run by an Asian female have to do with context regarding gay slurs??? Are Asian female bloggers representatives of the gay community and their words unquestionable??
If your response to the first few comments was along the lines of ‘hey I see where you might be coming from’ I doubt this thread would have continued. Your first response was to dismiss those who disagreed as having no sense of humor and so here we are. But what’s the point of continuing this debate? Everyone should be able to hear the private conversations you had with your boyfriend and understand the context of course. Clearly beauty blogs are the place to learn that stereotypes are true, ‘too gay’ is a good way to describe something without context and if you’re offended, you have no sense of humor.
Yes, now I’m stereotyping.
Here's an example of a useful stereotype: the person over there with boobs is probably a woman. Here's another: the policeman over there directing traffic is probably acting out of duty, therefore I should follow his directions without question. There are rogue policemen, and people with boobs who aren't women, but the vast majority of the time, these assumptions are correct. This is what I meant by "stereotypes are frequently correct", although I suppose I should've said "some stereotypes are correct a majority of the time" to make it clearer that I didn't mean "many stereotypes can be applied across the board correctly".
DeleteI've stated that:
(a) perhaps I didn't provide enough context (I thought that in the post, with the note about rainbows, it was pretty obvious that "gay" meant "related to homosexuality", since rainbows are a traditional gay symbol, but perhap not)
(b) I assumed some of my readers knew more about me than they do
(c) that people have a right to be offended
Again, what I'm annoyed at is:
(a) the implication that certain things are never funny
(b) the implication that one must be "insecure" or unintelligent, or ignorant to find stereotype-based humour funny
(c) the idea that using the term "gay" as a synonym for "homosexual" is something that should be stamped out
Thanks for your thoughtful reply to my post above.
DeleteI come as a sociologist, so I appreciate your introducing research into the discussion. But, I don't think that the literature - or even the blog post to which you linked - is strong enough to defend the position that jokes (or colloquial speech) cannot be harmful. The blog post even describes a finding that subjects with anti-homosexual attitudes were more likely to propose cuts to gay organizations after hearing a gay joke.
I teach a class on racial/ethnic categorization, which also engages the extent to which stereotyping is the consequence of an inherent cognitive need to give structure to our perceptions of the world. What sociology does, though, goes beyond acknowledging that basic categorization or stereotyping can be useful heuristically and shows how the content of the particular stereotypes that people use in certain contexts are quite often historical products of existing social inequalities and can also serve to perpetuate them. Perhaps there is a cognitively useful reason to assume that breasts denote a person of the female gender. But, whether or not a stereotype is adaptive on an individual level says nothing of its consequences on a social level. There are heuristic reasons, for example, for an employer to assume that a black job applicant in Los Angeles (my city) received a poorer quality education than his or her white counterparts. But, for reasons that I hope are clear, it would be problematic from a social perspective were they to use that stereotype in hiring. In part, this is because the educational divide by race is itself the consequence of historical social inequalities.
I am not suggesting a direct analogy between that and referring to a nail polish as "too gay", but there is an extent to which the stereotypical image of gay men -- an image that some conform to, and that's fine -- is the product of historical inequalities which limited gay self-expression and conceptualized it as essentially unmasculine. Like many other marginalized groups, gay communities leveraged their social ostracism into affirmative identities. But gay activism sought the right of the gay community/individuals to define themselves without intervention from straight society. Adopting a distinctive 'queer' aesthetic wasn't a free pass to stereotype all gay people according to that scene, but a rejection of external efforts to define gayness. The difference between a gay man choosing to wear glitter and a straight man declaring glitter "too gay" is therefore the difference between recognizing the right of a minority group to observe its own range of possible forms of self expression and coming in as an outsider and defining a group on unequal terms.
To be honest, I don't even think it is fair to assume that a guy wearing glitter is gay! But beyond the fact that the stereotype isn't totally reliable, I wish that something "looking gay" wasn't regarded as a reason for straight men not to like something. Being straight doesn't mean being naturally predisposed against wearing things that gay people wear or vice versa. And even to the extent that one's preferences correspond precisely to social expectations (i.e. a straight guy who hates glitter), it needn't be expressed in terms which suggest that straight people should look straight and gay people should look gay. I wish people would appeal to their personal preferences more than their social categorizations when explaining why they like or don't like things!
Ceteris paribus, it wouldn't matter if "too gay" was used by straight people in the limited context of stating that a particular commodity connotes an identity other than their own. However, there is a long history of men avoiding seeming gay because of its implications within the logic of a predominantly heteronormative society. That is why I think referring to something as "too gay" is casually homophobic without additional context.
Thank you for your reply coriander - I enjoy reading them because they're well thought out, and sensible.
DeleteNo, I didn't mean to say that stereotype-based humour isn't ever harmful using the article above (and again, I should've been more specific) - I was largely referring to the commentary on context being crucial to whether stereotype-based humour is offensive (and I would add, some jokes are simply not amusing in any context, because they're poorly written).
I agree that it would be great if "looking gay" wasn't a reason to not like something, but IMO your comment is missing an additional layer of subtlety - often, when a man declares X as "too gay" for them, it's not because they think X is gay (or even that they dislike X), but because if they wear or admit to liking X, their associates will look down on them/make incorrect assumptions. I think these sorts of problems with wider societal expectations are best addressed by subverting these expectations by members of society whose [insert characteristic here] is beyond reproach, e.g. scar-faced, supermodel-dating Seal donning nail polish. For example, I'm frequently forced to explain to people that my pole dancing class contains two PhDs, two medical doctors, a pharmacist and a lawyer. However, in a setting where I may not be able to curtail the assumptions of others, pole can be "too slutty" for me to mention, without any dislike on my part (far from it!).
Perhaps "too gay" is not the most PC of word choices, but a subtlety which I think many of the commenters here are missing is that the intended humour is not that something is gay, ha ha - it's the cognitive dissonance of a straight guy who declares that glitter (something which has a debatable designation as "gay") is "too gay", yet loves wearing rainbows (something which is a de facto official gay symbol).
Haha love this! Definitely need more Trent guest posts. My boy hates sparkles too but I keep shoving them in his face trying to force him to like them. Was Fatal Attraction the one you picked up at the Sydney meetup? I remember you saying somthing about him probably liking it.
ReplyDeleteI've been trying exposure therapy too, but no luck! Yes, Fatal Attraction is the one from the Sydney Meetup! Good memory :)
DeleteI dunno if that was was intended, but not cool
ReplyDeleteBiggest laugh I've had all day, my man seems just as impressed by my beauty product obsession as yours does! I especially loved all the colour descriptions!
ReplyDeleteHe thinks I need to cut down to 100 polishes. Nuh uh.
DeleteThis was so funny!
ReplyDeleteGlad you enjoyed it! :)
DeleteLove Trent's review! He should do this more! I think Majestic Flight will grow on him...
ReplyDeleteI somehow doubt it will! Too holo...
DeleteMost hilarious post that I have read- especially with the editorials. Good luck with your thesis. When it is done, it is a most wonderful feeling!
ReplyDeleteThanks - I sent what should hopefully be the final draft to my supervisor last night, can't wait to hand in!
DeleteThat's so funny! I love greens. I'd never seen orlys cochella dweller... Will have to see if I can find it online store
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty new, and has a great formula :)
DeleteI'm feeling curious: did he wear Fatal Attraction eventually? Will he? I want to see the swatches :-)
ReplyDeleteHe wore a very similar franken I made on his toes for a few weeks :)
DeleteHAHAHAH so hilarious! ^^
ReplyDeletebut, if he was impressed with the names is because he knows our Brazilian brands and their "creativity", one worse than the other HAHAHA
amazing post! :*
Haha - I only own one Brazilian polish and its name is something like "09"...
DeleteOh my god, you need to do a weekly Boyfriend's Bad Opinions post because this is the funniest thing I have ever read. I'm considering showing this to my bf so he can just nod and laugh because I'm 99% certain he would come to the same conclusions.
ReplyDeleteHaha! I'm glad I'm not the only one with a boyfriend who hates most of my polish collection :)
DeleteYou know what I think? This could turn into a "My boyfriend reviews nail polish" tag ;) Dooo eeet!
ReplyDeleteLol! I'm not sure how one starts a tag though?
DeleteLoved it! Trent definitely needs to return, wonder if I can convince my partner to give it a go.
ReplyDeleteSide note, where is Trent's rainbow dinosaur shirt from? I totally need to buy my partner one, can't get enough dino shirts.
Threadless :) I'm pretty sure they have lots of other dino designs too!
Delete"Most men do not get excited by sparkly things, the ones who do are fairies. Men cannot tell the difference between “big” and “small” sparkles, between “glitters” and “shimmers” or whatever other names they may come by, all we see is tacky sparkles."
ReplyDeleteI think this part illustrates the view of homo- and heterosexual men in this post. The writer contrasts men with "fairies". He obviously uses the term "men" to describe heterosexual men and the term "fairy" to describe homosexual men (as if they weren't men).
I don't care if the writer is homophobic or not, this post still contributes to a negative view of men that don't act or look a certain way (whether they're gay or straight). I think that gay men who don't identify with glitter (so to say) and straight men who loves glitter nail polish (yes, there's a lot of them) becomes even more invisible every time people write things like this. As if they're not invisible enough as it is. I should know, I'm one of them.
This blog isn't an isolated context in it self, it exists in a much bigger context. No one is forbidding anyone to joke here. But you should think about what causes people the most damage; to think twice before you make a joke in public or to constantly have to deal with stereotypes about who you are? Never forget that men around the world are abused on a daily basis for such things as wearing glitter nail polish. That's the sad, bigger context of the society that this blog and it's readers exists in, and you can't just make that context go away by saying that you're not homophobic.
As a straight, male polish lover I actually don't feel comfortable being here any longer. I really hope that the writer of the post and the owner of the blog would let the whole "homophobic or not" thing go and start seeing their actions in a bigger context. What you write affects people whether you want it or not. Maybe it's just a joke to you but to lots of us it's a part of the battle we have to fight every day just because we like glitter. I'm shure you meant no harm but please stop defending the post and just think about it for a while.
How terrible that you have to fight this "battle" because you like glitter. How you get discriminated against when you're looking for a job, how you get paid less than your non-glitter-loving counterparts, how you get sneered at in the streets. This is the epitome of straight male privilege.
DeleteHahahahaha. This is so identical to something that my boyfriend would say! Thought he usually just grunts when I shove my fingertips in his face for his opinion. Can't wait for more guest posts from him!
ReplyDeleteHahahahaha. This is so identical to something that my boyfriend would say! Thought he usually just grunts when I shove my fingertips in his face for his opinion. Can't wait for more guest posts from him!
ReplyDeleteHe can post anytime, as long as he keeps his shirt off! And maybe look at the camera next time. ;)
ReplyDeleteAm I the only one who envisioned Tinkerbell when Tren referenced fairies? Well written and funny, Trent keep being you, life is to short for drama :)
ReplyDeletePosting as anon because I don't have access to the other ways to log in and would never link my gmail to anything, but my name is Julia and I've read this blog and follow your IG for some time. I am relieved to see people call out your boyfriend on his homophobic and sexist comments. Perhaps he is not a homophobe, perhaps he is not sexist, but his comments definitely are. Making inferences that no straight, lady-loving male could ever enjoy glitter, color, or anything girly is homophobic and sexist. It's saying that anything that a woman could like is stupid, worthless, less-than, and not important. Saying things like men can't tell size or color difference is also sexist towards men and really demerits them as conscious, thoughtful people. What about women who don't like nail polish? Or men, gay or straight, who do, or who like it? Is there something wrong with them? According to your boyfriend's arbitrary rules about Who Can and Can't Like Things, yes. There's a reason people are calling this out. It's not because we hate him, or you, but because it's a real shame and a bummer to encounter sexism and homophobia.
ReplyDeleteAccording to you, there is an awful lot to be bummed out by, and there are much bigger fights for you, and if this is a true reflection of your beliefs, I encourage you to fight them rather than waste your time here. Perfume companies infer that women like to smell like flowers, and therefore there's something wrong with women who don't like to smell like flowers. Cosmetic companies only feature women in their ads - is there somthing wrong with women who don't wear cosmetics? Zoya name their polishes after women's names. You yourself used the word "girly" - you're inferring that certain things are the domain of girls, which infers that there's something wrong with women who don't enjoy these things, or men who do, and by your definition, that's sexist against both men and women. Don't get me wrong - I don't mean to say that your viewpoint is incorrect or stupid - I just prefer that when people have strong convictions, they're consistent.
Delete"There are much bigger fights for you... I encourage you to fight them rather than waste your time here."
DeleteJust because there are "bigger fights" does not mean people are wrong to call you and your boyfriend out for socially oppressive language-- I'm glad to see so many people have done it. There might have been "bigger fights" than Rosa Parks needing to sit down on the bus one day, but that's the fight she chose, and it created waves of much-needed social change.
It amazes me that you're not getting this, especially after coriander's academic response, but I really hope that some of the comments here have planted seeds for both of you that might sprout some serious change after a bit more time and thought. You can swear up and down that you're not homophobic, but if you're perpetuating socially oppressive language (and you absolutely are, both him in saying it and you in defending it), you're still part of the problem.
I sincerely that hope you figure all this out soon, because you have the potential to be a real ally here.
Has it occurred to you that the people here leaving negative comments hold (in most cases) drastically different positions? It's not a case of "getting this".
DeleteMargaret Cho has said she loves the word "faggot", Reginald D Hunter called his tour "Trophy Nigga", the website The Anti-Bogan posts examples of racist hate speech from Facebook. Do you think these are also "perpetuating socially oppressive language"?
If you think yes, then fine, we'll have to agree to violently disagree. If you think no, then perhaps you need to reflect on why not. And if your answer is "she's gay-friendly" or "he's black", you're being lazy.
LabMuffin - I am a social worker and will have my MSW in May. I dedicated my career to others, especially those disnefranchized or disempowered by social inequalities, so it's safe to safe I am fighting "bigger fights." One of those fights is against casual misogyny. I am free to point it out even if you dislike it. And how is it that you're able to earn your PhD AND enjoy nail polish, but I can't?
DeleteRe: girly - I meant it as a descriptor for what is socially considered feminine. I also never said anything about women who like nail polish (I am one?) or whatever you were going on about, so whatever inconsistencies you think I spoke, you inferred them with giant leaps of logic.
From your replies it's clear you plan to stay on defense and put absolutely zero effort actually considering what we're trying to say or taking responsibility (though your boyfriend said it, not you, but you're involved by repeatedly defending it). Guess I'll add that to the infinite list of bummers that I carry around.
You're allowed to point whatever out. I'm also allowed to post a humorous article which uses liberal amounts of hyperbole and assume that people are intelligent enough to not need a sign saying "Beware! Hyperbole! There may be exaggerations for comic effect! Like every other form of comedy!" to spot it.
DeleteFor my next trick, I'm going to complain about how racist Stuff White People Like is, because I'm Asian and I like at least half the stuff on the list, and my boyfriend is white and he doesn't like all of those things. How dare they infer that non-white people could never enjoy #7 - Diversity.
Part of the reason it's hard to crack down on racist/sexist/homophobic jokes is the whole accusation of not having a sense of humour. That makes me a little bonkers! Almost as bonkers as the argument "I can't be homophobic, I have gay friends", which is entirely meaningless. I find a lot of things funny, just not things that rely on stereotypes (largely negative) to be funny. I sometimes amuse myself by explaining the joke loudly, eg. "Oh, that is funny because being the guy hugged another guy, which could mean he's gay, and being gay is BAD." If that's the punch line, get a new joke.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read this post I was surprised by the "humour", but more dismayed by how many people reacted positively! I was going to comment but after seeing all the cheering, I thought I'd pass and just make a mental note to unsubscribe, which was lazy of me. I'm not unsubscribing in a rage, I just find myself exhausted by such attitudes and I don't want to read more "casually homophobic" stuff than I already am exposed to.
I agree entirely with Coriander and Katherine Cole, though I did read your responses LM. I understand your frustration and have felt it myself. I have also made comments in the past that were dismissive of certain problems, and when someone responded negatively, I was irritated that they were being so SERIOUS and couldn't they get I was just being funny? But the more I considered it, and tried to imagine myself in the shoes of someone who was disrespected in this way all the time, the more uncomfortable I became. Even though I would never seriously have disregarded those people, doing it even in passing, in humour, is not okay.
So personally, I don't expect a sudden reversal or apology or anything like that. I just hope this will be cause for food for thought! I hope you will think on it, and not dwell on the blaming nature of criticism or feel defensive.
The intended humour with regard to the glitter/gay thing is the incongruity of a straight man who has a knee-jerk reaction to glitter (something that is linked to a highly visible gay subculture, but is obviously not something embraced by an overwhelming majority of gay men) as being "too gay", yet adorns himself in rainbows (something that has been consciously adopted as an almost universal symbol of gay pride). I thought that was obvious, but perhaps I misestimated my audience. I agree, if the punchline was "glitter is gay", that would not be a joke worthy of inclusion. My frustration here mainly stems from the fact that people are assuming that "glitter is gay" is the intended punchline, which is frankly insulting to everyone's intelligence.
DeleteIs the punchline of Dave Chappelle's black white supremacist sketch that white supremacism is funny, or that black people are so dumb they're racist towards themselves? No - it's that white supremacists' thought patterns are cray-cray. Similar story here.
Stop saying that your boyfriend "adorns himself in rainbows" as if he therefore magically can't be homophobic. He said it himself:
Delete"I don’t see rainbows, and if I did, I would like it less."
Not buying it.
So now people aren't allowed to have personal opinions on something as basic as rainbows?
DeletePersonally, I don't like wearing very dark eye make-up. If I say that in a comment such as "I wish this product didn't turn out so goth-like" am I saying I'm against goths as a subculture? No, I'm just stating my personal preference. If I don't like glitter (which I didn't on my nails for a long time), it doesn't mean I'm anti-gay, it just means I don't like glitter, or that glitter doesn't mesh with my personal style/identity.
(Outside of drama-- Michelle, this was a hilarious post, and I very much hope we get more of them, all with the same classic Aussie bloke tone!)
This was a very funny post. Kudos to the man for having the gonads to do it. However, didn't help much in what the formula was like etc,. Would like to see more comments from him (man's p.o.v etc) but still need your input too. :)
ReplyDeleteDespite the drama, I enjoyed this post. This is why we can't have nice things.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. I want nice things! :(
DeleteThanks for the post. I finally just realized my husband too hates glitter. It just dawned on me when I read his comments lol.
ReplyDeleteHAHA! I love it!
ReplyDeleteThis is the best blog post of 2013! I know it's only February, but I'm done with this year! :D It was so fun to read! ^_^
ReplyDeleteGlad it scored so highly in your opinion! :)
DeleteI'm sad, I really liked your blog. I enjoyed reading about chemistry and nails.
ReplyDeleteI'm a person who identifies as gay/queer and I don't see sparkles as part of being gay. I also don't see the innocence of joking about how something is basically not good and also gay, it's really weird that you don't see how that's a problem.
It's so easy to leave nasty language out of things, I'm sorry to say I don't feel welcome or comfortable here anymore: Not something I would have ever thought I'd be saying about a MAKEUP BLOG.
Your argument about comedians is strange to me. David Chappelle makes jokes about a group he belongs to, so does Margaret Cho. By virtue of being your boyfriend, I'm going to guess your BOYFRIEND isn't gay, and therefore his joking (as part of the dominant group) is severe and hurtful to those of us in the minority group. Picking on "the other guy" is always funny to the dominant group, but it takes a compassionate person to learn to understand how that feels to the minority group.
I am not hateful here, instead I feel hurt and sad. Deeply profoundly unwelcome. Perhaps it's time to reconsider your position on this issue, and make this right going forward.
I'm sorry you feel hurt by this, but I stand by my position, which perhaps I can explain to make it less strange to you.
DeleteI strongly disagree with the assertion that you have to belong to a minority group for it to be ok to make jokes concerning that minority group, nor that all members of said minority group would be hurt by the joke, nor that a joke about the minority group is always acceptable when it's made by a member of that minority group. For example - I'm Asian. I'm ok with most of my non-Asian friends making Asian jokes, more ok than I am with some of Margaret Cho's less funny squinty-eyed exaggerated-accent Asian jokes. It's all about context and intent for me, rather than any black-and-white distinction based on attributes (sexual orientation, ethnicity) people were or weren't born with.
For example, would it be ok for a hypothetical straight stand-up comedian, raised by two gay parents who fully support their child, to make observations about his non-heteronormative upbringing? Perhaps you would say no, but I would say maybe/probably yes, although it ultimately would depend on the context and intent behind the material.
Thank you for your reply, but instead of being "sorry" I urge you to instead try to understand why I am feeling this strongly (and no, it's not due to "an oversensitive nature" or any other nonsense.) My complaint is totally legit here.
ReplyDeleteYou're right, it's not just about being a MEMBER of A GROUP. The power of that group makes a huge difference.
If you're a member of a dominant group making jokes about an OPPRESSED group, (and in this example, yes your boyfriend and you [by condoning it] are) what you're doing is essentially bullying.
You are a person with power using that power in way that is also used to hurt people without power. IE you are a straight person making jokes about gay persons.
It's not even close to the same if a gay person says "Man, straights are stupid breeders" even though it's a dick thing to say, because gays are not members of the dominant group, so their harm is limited comapred to a group who has power over the other group.
What you're doing when you're calling out things as gay is you're treating "gay" like an "OTHER". You're not just calling out a difference, you're marking gay to the outside world as non-normal, other, and to be excluded, or possibly even as something bad and to be shunned. Man that's clearly harmless, I'm sure this has nothing at ALL to do with why gays worldwide are killed or excluded from society. Just being casual about it does nothing to change the fact that will be incorporated into the fabric of the world every time it is used. Being ignorant of this effect does not absolve you of responsiblity for it.
I think you probably are a good person who just doesn't realize the injustice of what you're doing. Can you think of injustice you might notice and take action about if you thought it might make a difference to do so?
So even if you don't think it's FAIR that you don't get to say those things it's not for no reason just because you don't yet understand the reason.
Most people from dominant groups just argue and defend themselves because they don't want to be wrong, they don't want to look stupid, they don't want to change anything for OTHER PEOPLE (no fair!!) and then they just refuse to learn. I wish more people put effort into trying to understand complaints other people have rather than just standing there in stubborn opposition. Does it take away your power if you change your mind? Does it take anything away from you to learn this? No. People in stubborn opposition aren't trying to understand they're trying to save face, but they just embarrass themselves and create distance from people trying to talk to them, and they refuse to learn anything.
You probably won't listen to anything I'm saying here, but it'd benefit you a lot if you try to understand what others are saying. If you're interested I can link you to some good articles, or I can engage with you further.
In the meantime, here's a helpful flow chart to illustrate more easily when saying things like GAY are problematic.
http://degreesearch.org/blog/when-its-okay-to-say-gay/
I just love how if someone doesn't agree with you it MUST be because they don't understand. It couldn't possibly be that they understand your position and still disagree with it. Frankly, it's annoying to be told that I (or anyone else) must be dim-witted, ignorant or just plain stubborn if we refuse to 'see the light' of the other person's position.
DeleteThanks Rachel - I agree, I'm getting frustrated with this too.
DeleteCake-Pie - I'm pretty sure I understand your position - I am a member of a minority group (Asian) which arguably undergoes far more widespread, partially government-condoned discrimination in Australia these days than the gay community (immigration from South East Asia is a big issue here, and I get told to go back to my country by white-skinned strangers about once a month). So yes, I understand Othering and injustice, and I have felt it myself quite frequently. But despite this, I disagree that all jokes that come from the mouths of members of majority groups about minority groups perpetuate injustice in society, or are even necessarily Othering, as you seem to be saying. I am ok with Asian jokes most of the time, depending on context, even if made by "dominant" white people. I died laughing in this South Park episode. I think "too Wongs don't make a white" is a great pun, although I've heard it a few too many times. And it's not because I'm ashamed of my culture, or hate myself, or have an "undersensitive nature", or any of those other things you've mentioned. And I don't think you realise that there are many people out there from minority groups who also take a similar position. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
As the part of the article in question is discussing rainbows and glitter, I think it's safe to say that the word "gay" here is "a place or thing related to gay culture" according to the flow chart, and it wouldn't make any sense to replace the word with any of the helpful suggestions like insipid, weak, foolish etc. It could perhaps be replaced by "too stereotypically homosexual", which isn't on the flow chart - I take this to mean that they agree with me that it's a grey area, and not as black-and-white as you assert.
I actually LOL'd at this post, so much so that I dragged my husband across to read it as well and he laughed right along with me. I'm sorry you received such negative comments, but I applaud you for leaving the post on here and responding, rather than just removing it, which clearly would have been easier for you.
ReplyDeletethe Nubar Greenish sparkles has some lovely colour tones, and some really good posts here too...............! love this blog
ReplyDeleteThis is hilarious :)
ReplyDelete