data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d8599/d8599790b0e55a1d716da69bc51d873e7faeee79" alt=""
Also similar is the really expensive necklace/hat/doodad that is supposed to benefit charity. We all know it's breast cancer awareness month when a zillion pink things start appearing on the shelves of stores nationwide. What better way to help cure a disease that effects women than with shopping, which is what women just, like, do anyway? Lucky Magazine always has a section devoted entirely to "charity buys" - even though I can't help but imagine the ecological cost of producing that $191 pillow probably makes the 30% supposedly donated to offset the "world water crisis" less significant.
Here we have the new $50, Miley Cyrus designed t-shirt
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6f896/6f896d7b2f59c1662447c842722f44387cbf5740" alt=""
Yeah, their unique marketing concept, because that's all these things are. Never is it specified how much money is actually going to charity (And, as we all learned from The Simpsons, zero percent is a portion too!) or that the company is non-profit. I can't believe they have the nerve to act as though they are improving women's self esteem through some fugly, expensive, sweatshop-made tees with the words "love" printed on them.
Historically, women have had an interesting connection with philanthropy (okay, I wrote a paper with this thesis once...I could go on) because it's always been a way they could effect political, economic, and social change while still retaining stereotypical feminine traits- you're not being an activist, you're just gently helping out! Spreading the love! Adding the shopping middleman to the mix makes it an even more passive way to supposedly change the world. With all this hullabaloo about greeness, no one wants to point out that there's nothing green about buying newly produced things, even if those things are Kate Hudson's new organic shampoo line (ooh, she's posing on the savannah! How "I am African!")
And for the celebs and the companies, the whole deal is obviously a PR thing. The stars look good because they took time out of their busy
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d98fd/d98fdfc0ff5b55f5eef7d3018c6d27c46022582f" alt=""
If you really want to help people, write a fucking check to a real charity organization, or, you know, actually get involved in something that doesn't happen at the mall.
PS: Vom!
PPS: Don't worry, not all my posts are going to relate to politics from now on. I've got some anti-leggings stuff in the works!
3 comments:
This is Bono's fault.
what isn't? certainly not the rise of wrap around colored-lense sunglasses.
Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a really great article in Harper's about all the "buy this pink crap for breast cancer!" bullshit that companies sponsor a few years ago. You should read it, it's really good.
http://bcaction.org/index.php?page=welcome-to-cancerland-2
Also, can you write a blog about the rachel zoe project? it's like, i hate that show but i can't turn away!
Post a Comment