Course Blog for GWSS 1002: The Politics of Sex

Celebrities or persons of prestige have always held a great deal of sway over the attitudes and ideals of their audiences. In some ways they become the pinnacle of the highest principles of those who look up to them the most. But as with all people, there are always two sides to the celebrities which come to be held in such high esteem. Eventually every celebrity cracks and are given a glimpse into the “real” side of their personality.
An interesting example is that of Jimmy Swaggart, that fire and brimstone preacher caught with his hand in the preverbial cookie jar. In this instance it is not so much that a celebrity crossed the line and was found out. His true transgression had been to hold up a very high standard of sexual morality and preaching of its virtues. This no doubt endeared him to conservatives and fueled his televangelism. But once he had been discovered he apologized only for the sin of infidelity. “The sin for which Swaggart has been forgiven is the sexual transgression for which he has apologized.”(Gamson, 188). What he failed to address was the manner in which he had destroyed his reputation as a preacher. He had been looked to and expected to hold a higher moral ground and not fall for the sinful temptations which afflict the common man. But because of his status as a nationally known preacher and televangelism celebrity, all that was required was that he apologize and ask God for forgivness, then jump right back to the pulpit.

Posted by Newprophet at 12:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Daily Mail, a UK paper with an extensive gossip section, is revisiting the scandals of Charlotte Rampling. A new biography is in the works, written by an old friend. Previously supportive of the biography, Rampling is reportedly spending a great deal of money trying to block a certain portion from being published. The Daily Mail desperately wants to know why. I admit, I’m curious. Celebrities rarely interest me, though sex scandals a bit more so, yet I’m also interested in what a woman famous for scandals and nervous breakdowns wants to hide. I’m also curious why the public thinks it has any right to know.

Charlotte Rampling is an older actress whose sexual life often overshadows her career. This stems largely from the crossover: she’s largely famous for appearing as a masochist submissive of a former Nazi in the film “The Night Porter”. Ramping is known for being candid about her private life, without fear of the scandals that followed her.

She was rejected by Hollywood’s star machine and left in England to develop her fame on a smaller, more personal level, allowing her some freedoms that mass-produced celebrities are advised against pursuing.

Shortly after Rampling and her first husband, Bryan Southcombe, had their first child, another young man, a model named Randall Laurence, moved into their apartment with them. Rampling told a reporter that she loved them both. The Press eagerly jumped on her words and widely published stories of her menage a trois. The Daily Mail reported that the Pope spoke out against her, though it’s hard to verify.

She later told columnist Earl Wilson, "There are so many misunderstandings in life. I once caused a scandal by saying I lived with two men [...] I didn't mean it in a sexual sense [...] We were just like any people sharing an apartment."
She personally told Peter Evans, the writer of “The Daily Mail” article, “'I've never had any trouble attracting publicity. True, false, half-true, it sort of follows me around like a cheap perfume, which men often find exciting.” These denials are brilliant “spin”. They make her appear victimized. The story followed her after her denials, allowing her to put forth a mysterious, sexy front for those looking for one, but a contrite, embarrassed smile for accusers. Essentially, she captured all the fame of a sex scandal without consequence.

Joshua Gamson evaluated Hugh Grant’s rebound from a prostitute scandal as a manufacturing process. About Grant’s public apology, Gamson quoted a nameless “New York Times” editor: “A great success. He stayed in character.” Rampling’s character has always been frank, supposedly open about most of her life and quite vocal about what was not in bounds. It’s no wonder she needs to manipulate her image, and knows how to do so. She discovered her second husband’s unfaithfulness through reading the tabloids!

Gamson wrote “What is revealed in sex scandal discourse is not simply societal norms--sexual or other, institution-specific, or not--but also the institutional operations and relations of news media.” Rampling is currently battling a new scandal: having already survived being reprimanded by the Pope for her polyamorous household, the media cannot figure out what else she could possibly hide. So "The Daily Mail" published an entire article about a speculative sin.

Posted by babelsburgfx at 12:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In our society, we idolize the rich and famous and hold the stars of media as demigods of our culture. The lives of these celebrities are held to an amount of scrutiny unparalleled to any other persons where we as a public have an understanding of both the public and private aspects of the celebrity’s life. It is the public life that is sold us as consumers of their mediums, but it is the private life we feed off of--we want to know as much about anything and everything of our favorite stars as we can, and the system that Hollywood and other media institutions subscribes to gladly offers it to us.

Through the vast powers bestowed upon them, stars, whether unintentional or otherwise, greatly affect our cultural sexual discourses. Richard Dyer, author of “Stars”, states that they mediate the contradictions of sexuality found within our patriarchal society, whether by reinforcing them or by back lashing against them. Celebrities are constantly confronted with questions concerning their private lives, especially regarding their sexuality. This requires a certain amount of openness not required of the average person where many do not find themselves comfortable with discussing such private matters, though most oblige. It was Magic Johnson, the famous basketball player, who pushed the HIV/AIDS epidemic into the forefront, having only been thought of as a “gay disease” prior to his announcement that he, a straight famous man adored by women and idolized by men alike, had been infected with the disease. He provided a service to the public in informing us about the true impartialness of the disease and changed the way in which sexual ills, in the literal and figurative form, are thought of, and in effect helped in partially de-stigmatizing gay sexuality by removing the exclusiveness of HIV/AIDS from the gay community.

Posted by chromeswan at 12:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

We are fascinated by sex scandals and other people’s dirty laundry, even when they do not involved celebrities. In fact, those involved in the scandals become stars in their own way. Sex scandals seam to reinforce societal norms, masculine sexuality seams to be validated. The media also helps validating male sexuality and the social norms by airing sex scandals and making celebs out of every day people. According to Gamson “ the women whose sexuality was for rent were dismissed or further objectified by storytelling (largely erased from the mainstream media stories) while the men who purchased sexual services were located in a masculine world in which prostitution visits were often narrated as demonstration of manhood”. When men are caught with women who are forced into position, they are slapped on the wrist. The idea in society is that “men are just acting out their natural urges,” yet the women involved are arrested, physical and mentally abused and open to dieses. When sex scandals are discovered we seem to be fascinated with the women involved there are interviews with her asking “why she did this or did she know the man.” Society seams to shame her, yet the men involved simply say they are sorry and society just shrugs and forgives him, because that is what men do. In the case of actor Hugh Grant, his sex scandal helped his celeb status, because of rumors of him being gay; having sex with a prostitute confirmed his masculinity. It is unfortunate that society looks at the roles of men and women in involved in sex scandals differently and validates men’s sexuality over women’s sexuality.

Posted by robin593 at 12:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Empowered by the "star system," celebrities' personal lives become as equally necessary for us as an audience to latch onto the star as their public lives. Gossip magazines, candid videos and pictures, private moments all become a way in which we are able to relate to the celebrity on a humane level. Along with the capturing of these private moments, spills out celebrity sex scandels that immediately are taken hold by a media forenzy. Once private, sex secrets become common knowledge among everyday people to judge, talk about, critique, etc. Many times, the talking, judging, critiquing only begin at the actual sex scandel of the celebrity and funnel out into an array of topics of much larger social ills and injustices.

Richard Dyer writes in "Heavenly Bodies" about this important split of the celebrity's private and public life. He explains that celebrity scandels make the star that much more desireable. A slippery slope of juicy details leave the audience wanting to know more and more about the celebrity, using media as the middle-man bad guy to expose the most private of moments to the viewers.

Furthermore, Joshua Gamson writes of the additional consequences of celebrity sex scandels involving criticism of larger, social ills and media constructions of the viewer's feelings. He writes that "sexual 'misbehavior' kick the story into gear and are then mostly sidelined" to discussions further outlining the social ills surrounding the sex scandel. Things like hypocrisy, risk, and disloyalty are often topics of these further discussion and critiques of the scandels, he further explains. Gamson also writes of the media construction of viewer feelings surrounding sex scandels. While the revelation of sexual scandels are narrated directly, they are also narrated indirectly, through "cultural givens" regarding the behaviors that storytellers take for granted. This molding of the story through the narrations of the media has a lot to do with how the viewers and audience receive and interpret the story. More clearly, the media constructs how we feel about the scandel.

In conclusion, not only do celebrity sex scandels throw us a bone into their personal lives, giving us one more thing for us to devour and adsorb about that star, it also gives us a plateau in which to discuss the greater problems of society. Our feelings about the celebrity are carefully molded by media narrations, telling us how we feel about that scandel and the celebrity more often than not, will come back using their "star system" power and make it okay for us again.

Posted by Dix-sept at 12:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Celebrities have a significant role within our society. They must take the responsibility of resorting the social norm when the society is faced new problematic issues. They are mythical figures to the public until the media exploit their private lives. What the media uncovers “dirt” from the celebrities private life it does not only affect the celebrities image, “risk of status loss”(186, Gamson), but it also affects all fans who idolized this celebrity. Due to the fan obsession and idolization of celebrities it is easy for them to be tempted to be involved in sexual relations. Therefore in Joshua Gamson’s article, “Normal Sins: Sex Scandal Narratives as Institutional Morality Tales”, Gamson explains how celebrities including politicians have been accused, and some convicted of various sex scandals. Gamson’s explicitly portrays various celebrity sex scandals in his article. Gamson states, “sexuality takes its place in these morality tales more as symbol and vehicle than as topic” (197). The public is alerted by the sexual actions which have happened; this triggers the discussion on the ethics of their actions. That has occurred to some celebrities in different scenarios. These actions raise questions on sexual morality, hypocrisy, recklessness, and beliefs. This is why it is critical for fans to examine the celebrities and not idolize their negative actions. The relationship created between fans and celebrities are very complicated, because the celebrity is seen as a greater/powerful yet real person. One might become blinded by their greatness and the media representation of them, thus the fan might suffer greatly because of the celebrity’s mistake. This situation might be more common amongst children and the celebrities they admire. Therefore, it is important for celebrities to understand their roles and responsibilities for the society, and also for the fans to critique examine their celebrities.

Posted by tabes002 at 12:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of the many reasons that we all flock to idea of celebrity is that these people personify a certain quality that makes us want to know more: this quality is charisma. Every star in the entertainment industry has a certain characteristic, whether it be the way they look or their values that they make known to us or by the roles they play that make us like them. They have, as Dyer points out in his work “Stars,” an “I don’t know what” quality that we can’t seem to get enough of. A prime example would be the recent come-back of Britney Spears. Whether or not we like her, we are drawn to her life. She began her stardom as this cute but sexy icon that young girls aspired to be and that men of all ages wanted to be with. Once she married and began having kids, we all saw the success she had achieved begin spiraling out of control. The drugs, the hair shaving, the cancelled shows, and the custody battles made us all need to know what was going on and regardless of our personal feelings of her we could not help but feel empathetic. It is this certain “I don’t know what” that at this precise moment in time I do not know how to describe. It is easy to see that the binary between the public and private life of Britney has all but disappeared. We can attribute this loss of separation in a celebrity’s life to the “star system.” Everything about Britney from the clothes she wears (or lack there of) to the kind of coffee she drinks are all results of this system that takes a young woman from Louisiana and turns her into an icon for whom we adore entirely.

Posted by Schaefer at 12:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It is impossible to deny that celebrities have an impact on societies views of several things, all one must do is look at how the general public act toward situational outcomes created by stars. Think about all the money invested in magazines, movies, and music that society continuously eats up, loving the drama that goes on behind the scenes of these actors/stars. The absurd thing is that people take some of these scandals personally, when in reality things like this occur regularly to average Joe Shmo’s. Due to people looking up to actors and people with money, nearly praising the characters that they play, when something occurs to a celebrity it is obvious that the public’s political sex spectrum is affected. From Gamson’s article “Normal sins: Sex Scandal Narratives as Institutional Morality Tales” there is a segment on Jimmy Swaggart. Swaggart was well known to be a strong televangelist and when he was found to be involved with a prostitute both the media and the public blew it out of proportion. Rather than blaming this man for going against the words he preached, blame was seen on the entire institution of televangelism, grouping this entire population in to a group of hypocrites. If something like this were to happen to an everyday average person, the public wouldn’t eat this drama up, making generalizations or claims. Another example of how stars affect society goes along with Dyer’s idea in the article “Stars.” When a movie character does something completely contradictory to the characters s/he has played in the past, the public becomes offended and extremely involved in the drama that follows. In the case of Hugh Grant, people were completely astonished to learn that he had become involved with a hooker. Due to the character he plays in his movies, which entail being a hopeless romantic tool, when he does something outlandish to this persona people become upset because they have looked up to him in the past. Celebrities are people; people with money. If the public would let them live their lives and not become so involved in the drama, maybe the public could for once live out their own lives to what they see fit.

Posted by fair0144 at 11:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It's time to return to an age old question: which came first, the celebrity or the fan? Fans would be hard to come by if there were no celebrities, but what kind of fame could any aspiring celebrity attain without any fans? This question is somewhat answered when Dyer talks about the "star system," the sources that create mountains of information around a particular celebrity. Celebrities and their publicists communicate constantly with the public through their films, magazines, interviews, and even their private lives (or perceived private lives). The fans communicate back with them through their reactions in fan mail, fan web sites, and especially their money. Often fans cling to a celebrity, analyzing and criticizing their every move. The fans and celebrities create each other, informing each other on what is positive and what is negative, what is popular and what is unpopular, what makes careers and what knocks careers from grace and into the gutter.

That is another interesting question: what really constitutes a fall from grace? Some fans will follow a star from fame through fall, rehabilitation, and to fame again never losing hope. What makes celebrities' lives interesting enough to follow them through everything, thick and thin? It must be in what Dyers labels as charisma, the 'special something' that makes these people loyal and interesting. This is what holds peoples' attention, what keeps momentum going when they do poorly. And it is only by the manipulation of this charisma that celebrities stay in their lofty position. Maybe in this new period of blogs and fan sites, the fans can take more control over what they see, but maybe they will instead merely be getting what the media wants to tell them.

Posted by Nillock at 11:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

As Gamson discussed in his article “Normal Sins: Sex Scandal Narratives as Institutional Morality Tales”, celebrity sex scandals have the potential to negotiate the way the general public sees the institutions the celebrity is involved in. Gamson examines three separate cases of a celebrity employing a prostitute and the different ramifications each sex act had on the public’s perception of the celebrity’s field. In the case of Jimmy Swaggert, his visits to prostitutes implied that the entire televangelist institution was sexually corrupt. The public believed his revealed hypocrisy was a window into the hypocrisy of an entire religious movement that didn’t practice what it preached. Hugh Grant’s rendezvous with prostitute Divine Brown was received much differently than the Jimmy Swaggert debacle. Grant’s behavior was seen as more risky than hypocritical. It spurred conversation about the industry’s ability to create an image for a celebrity that may be quite separate from their real-life, private self. If behind Hugh Grant’s bumbling boy-next-door persona there’s a guy that’s into street hookers, people asked, who else is not what they seem? Here again we see a celebrity’s sex scandal affecting the way the public viewed the industry as a whole. Dick Morris’ sex scandal created a distrust of politics. As an advisor to President Clinton, he was especially important to the Democratic Party. His sexual slip-up was seen as representative of the oiliness of the entire party, and perhaps of politicians in general. As with Grant’s and Swaggert’s cases, the focus shifted from the perpetrator to his institution; the public believed that the sex scandal was bigger than the person it directly involved. The sex scandals of Swaggert, Grant, and Morris all had an effect on the public’s perception of their respective institutions.

Posted by Alex Lucas at 11:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The public eats up celebrity gossip. Sometimes that takes the form of a tabloid article claiming that a star couple is having problems or a photo spread showing stars acting ‘normal.’ Often though, the most popular stories involve celebrity sex scandals. The public reaction generally begins with outrage at the ‘lewd’ and unmoral behavior of the star but then turn into a larger debate on social issues. As Gamson writes, “Sex scandals, far from lessons about individual sexual transgression, morph into institutional morality tales.” (page 188). In the case of Hugh Grant’s sexual encounter with a Sunset Boulevard prostitute, the debate looked at two issues. First, should his girlfriend Elizabeth Hurley forgive and forget? Others debated the impact of his actions on his career. Many agreed that his scandal actually helped his career as it gave him a bit of a dark side and made him a more intriguing person. His unintentional (or perhaps intentional) separation from his public self may have launched him forward, especially with the way he handled his explanation to the public. According to Gamson, “Grant became, that is, a better performer, a more typical Hollywood product, through the sex scandal.” (Page 194). The coverage of Grant’s scandal never really focused on the moral transgressions he made by soliciting sex from a prostitute. Instead, the media looked at the lifestyle pressures put on Hollywood celebrities insisting that it was inevitable for Grant to make this mistake. In fact, the public needs to see celebrities make mistakes in order to really propel them to superstar status.

Posted by haagx038 at 11:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Celebrities play a major role in impacting the way society views sexuality. Whether we like to think so or not, how they react to certain situations directly impacts how we also think of those situations. When we see a celebrity that has always been portrayed in a good light do something that may otherwise not see socially acceptable, we often reevaluate or views on what is acceptable. This is seen in the case of Ellen Degeneres. She is a very charismatic star and hard not to find likable. So when she decided to marry another woman, it seemed as though society was willing to change their perceptions of what it socially acceptable. If an average person in society chooses to marry someone of the same sex, society as a whole is not accepting. But since Ellen was previously known to society as someone with a level head, funny, and likable, it seemed very acceptable that she was doing so. In this example, society shifted their views because of the star system, a system Dyer explains in his "Stars" article. He explains that a star operates under two states, the public and the private. Since what Ellen does on TV is so acceptable, her private life seems to follow. In fact, my making her marriage so public, even allowing a magazine to print wedding pictures, she has made murky the star system by combining her public and private life. Dyer also addresses a star's charisma which plays a major role in the acceptance of Ellen's marriage. She possesses this sort of "somethingness" that you just can't put your finger on. You can't say quite what it is but you know you love watching her because of it. This, in turn, makes most things that she does acceptable, if only for the reason that it gives fans something to watch and read about, a way to see more of her. This, in turn, feeds the star system by adding to her charisma and to fans' knowledge of her personal and public life.

Posted by spiet002 at 11:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It is hard to write about the star system when one has rejected the star system. Although one might agree that stars do in fact represent a public's reaction to a given issue, if one chooses not to invest in these constructed lives, then one cannot write about them intelligently and insightfully any more than one could write about the sex life of any other person about who you do not know and about whom you know nothing. Nevertheless, there comes a time in the affairs of men when they must prepare to argue, not simply that which they know, but that of which they are entirely, completely and thankfully ignorant.

Although sexual scandals include an element of social norms, Gamson has argued that they are also affected by the institutional space in which they occur (Gamson 185). He uses the example of Hugh Grant being caught with a prostitute to demonstrate how the entertainment institutional structure does not cater primarily to social norms as the central issue but that instead maintaining an image and rehabilitating that public perception is regarded as key. Sex scandals in this view are not about the sex but about the pressures on an image which might result from sex.

Paris Hilton provides an surprisingly complex illustration of this idea. If a sex scandal is seen as not being about sex, her case would appear to be an exception. Media coverage, to the extent it occurred at all, could not be focused on a now-tarnished public image which needs to be rehabilitated. Instead, she was relatively unknown before the release of the tape which sparked the event. Media coverage instead was focused on the sexuality of the tape itself. Ultimately, this resulted in creating an indelible framework for her public image which she has used successfully to position herself as a sexual icon. But this is actually an isolated case outside the Gamson framework. He says that “a consistency between image and reality” (Gamson 194) is necessary for stars. But Hilton's images was created around the reality and positioned so that there need be no conflict. This is why her image did not require rehabilitation. Instead of fighting a sex scandal by attempting to maintain an image which excludes reality, Hilton demonstrates how a slight repositioning of an image to fit reality is surprisingly simple.

Posted by everythingisconstructed at 11:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Today's society, sexuality especially, is constently being modeled around the celebrity persona. Celebrities influence everything from fashion trends to what we eat, and most parts of the celebrity persona revolves around appearence and sexuality. Celebrities can affect the teenagers in both positive and negative ways, depending on the teen themselves. Catherine Lumby focuses specifically on how teenage girls are aware of what being a celebrity means and how some girls are particularly turned off by the lifestyle in which they live. In fact when Limby questions a group of teenage girls about the Australian singer, Nikke Webster, she found that some girls were very turned off by the celebrity life style. She says "...it is crucial to note that teenage girls are highly aware of the downside of celebrity: and invasive scrutiny of the celebrity's body and their private life" (347). The fact that it is proven teens tend to judge celebs for their actions and appearance is great because it is scary to think teens try to model and be just like these celebrities. Especially since those in the spotlight are ridicuolously skinny and almost to the point where a normal person can not achieve. It is very refreshing to see that teens are becoming so critical of those in the spotlight.

Posted by keute004 at 10:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Celebrities are a commodity to their fans. They are the puppets we as a society construct. We each have our idea of what they are, who they are and what they should do. Society casts them into a role, the persona they portray in the eye of the media and they follow said role, after all they are actors. When that role is defied, when society is proven wrong, it is a scandal. Society is shocked and has a field day because the puppet stepped out of character, faltered and failed. One prime example of celebrity falling out of the typecast society created is Hugh Grant and his sex scandal. In the public’s mind he embodied “The image of Grant, derived most from his film roles, as a ‘handsome leading man, best known for playing a shy romantic,’ ‘the Sauvé boyish-looking English star’, with the ‘bashful grin’ and the ‘sparkling GQ persona.’ “(Gamson 192) and the public was outraged and devastated when his actions went against such embodiment. As Gamson points out “what made Grant’s act so extraordinary wasn’t the sexual impropriety but the undercutting of a valuable image, the way the ‘bizarre arrest’, as People’s Grant- adorned cover put it, ‘tarnishes the image of Hollywood’s most charming leading man.’”(Gamson 192) We do not like to be proven wrong, or our conceptions/fantasies stirred up. Because as the Gamson’s piece continues to demonstrate is that the ‘celebrity sex scandal’ are usually not incredibly deviant sex but more so the fact that they go against about the fantasy/fabricated reality we have imposed on a celebrity.

Posted by Rowan at 10:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

When thinking about celebrities and the role they play in very publicly and visually describing how we (normal everyday people) “should” play out sexual roles in life it makes me think of how these sexual scandals affect young girls, the way they interpret these sex scandals and in turn how the way they choose to interpret these scandals. In Catharine Lumby’s article, Doing It For Themselves? Teenage Girls, Sexuality and Fame she examines a few groups of young women observing popular culture at work and citing how they interpret and react to these celebrities, and their publicly played out sex scandals. One would think, or I did at least, that young girls and women would be quite susceptible to these stars and the way they act and the things they say, copying them at every chance, however, what Lumby’s article shows is that young girls are hyper-critical of these stars and do not let them get away with very much. This was intriguing to me for the reason I stated earlier, that you would think that they would be very forgiving of these stars because they are just that, stars. She states, “However, at the same time it is crucial to note that teenage girls are highly aware of the downside of celebrity…” (Lumby 347) This obviously came as a surprise to me, a welcomes one. It was also refreshing to see that they were not obsessed with stars and how good thy looked skinny, in fact it was the opposite when they were commenting on Calista Flockhart a girl named Eleni said, “You’ve got to admit, her baby looks like its bigger than her. She looks like a lolly-pop, with a big head. Really quite scary…” (Lumby 347) This was very refreshing to see that while stars are putting their sex scandals and lives out for the public to comment and watch unfold our young generation is still quite critical and scrutinizing of these situations, and are not easily swayed to become like their stars when they make these questionable decisions.

Posted by redseal at 9:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Richard Dyer's statement that "stars embody social values that are to some degree in crisis," is indoubtably true. The first thing that came to my mind when I read that particular line was when television star Ellen "came out" as gay. At that time, very few people in the celebrity spot light were openly homosexual. In fact, I cannot think of anyone at that time that was publically homosexual, especially women in the industry who are continuously pressured to be beautiful and sexually attractive to the opposite sex. Homosexuality was still a very un-talked about subject and often had the negative conotation of AIDS and disease attached to it, making it even more taboo to disscuss; especially in the media. Ellen changed the face of homosexuality in Hollywood and across the world. A popular and charming actress/comedian was gay, proud, and willing to talk about it. Ellen is a perfect example of what Richard Dyer emphasizes in his article Stars. She changed people's social values and perspectives about homosexuality, it was no longer considered somethings a person would have to hide in their private life. It was something that crossed the boundries between the public and private. This positively affected everyday people who could now be openly gay without second guessing themselves, besides if Ellen could do it, anyone could! Her star quality and charisma were still intact while she broke down the assumptions of the general public that all celebrities had perfect, heterosexual, fairytale lives. Ellen dealt with a major societal issue in the public eye. She became even more admirable, desireable, and fascinating by being honest, real, and letting that inhance her celebrity status for the better.

Posted by alber215 at 9:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Every week each entertainment magazine, website, and television show displays the newest sex scandal as a way of pulling in viewers. The media loves a new scandal and so do the people. Sexual politics invade the lives of everyone, and even the uninterested catch wind of the most outrageous acts. Joshua Gamson, through example, displays the ways celebrities influence ideologies specifically through sex scandals. Most people have a dirty pleasure of enjoying the latest gossip and drama. The mixture of stardom and sexual acts makes for a well-selling story. Sex scandals show the masses that politics are not always clean, the nice guy is not perfect, and every person sins once in a while. Not only do the stories fulfill the “Id” desires of the common human, but they also go far beyond the act and shed light to the inner workings of large institutions. As Gamson says, “Sex scandal stories, rather than remaining stories of individual sexual transgression, are transformed into institutional morality tales” (314). The actual sex act remains in the spotlight temporarily and is followed by the discussion of morality and institutional corruption. People see the truth behind the words and realize what is being publicized likely happens more than is known.
Many individuals become invested in celebrities, and when scandals erupt they feel personally cheated on. In Gamson’s section on Hugh Grant, people reported the issue was not so much about Grant cheating on Elizabeth Hurley but more so that he was cheating on them (314). This is an example of how the influence of the stars goes beyond what they have achieved to gain power. Beyond their jobs, lifestyles, and looks, they have the power to influence ideologies and display the somewhat darker sides of many institutions.

Posted by olso4620 at 8:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Whether we like it or not, celebrities play a more significant role in our lives than we might think. Celebrity's actions can affect people who might not even know they are being affected. These people might engage in an action, or their lives might be slightly altering to compensate for their lack of not not being entirely like one of their favorite celebrities. When the topic of sex comes about when dealing with celebrities, and especially sex scandals, people need to realize that mimicking their favorite celebrity might not be the best decision. According to Joshua Gamson's "Normal Sins..." article, even people as powerful as national politicians have been accused of affairs with prostitutes, groping others, exposing themselves, and even having intercourse with minors. Becoming knowledgeable of this information should make all people aware that just because a certain person is famous doesn't mean they should be role models in your life. And if this brief information given by Gamson weren't enough, he goes on to talk in great detail about many of the sex scandals famous celebrities and politicians have been apart of over the last couple of decades.
Celebrity sex scandals is a very serious topic of conversation when discussing how famous people can have an impact on people's lives. However, an even more important issue is when young people can become mesmerized by famous musicians who they idolize. According to Catherine Lumby's "Doing It For Themselves..." teenage girls can be put in difficult situations by getting too close to their idols or experiencing fame at a young age can also have serious affects on a teenage girl's life.
Celebrities and the celebrity lifestyle for young people can have serious affects on their lives, and can take them away from a normal, healthy lifestyle if they're not careful and don't have a good head on their shoulders.

Posted by mank0058 at 7:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sarah Hahn
GWSS 1002
Blog #3
4/11/09

Celebrity Sex Scandals

Celebrities play many roles in society today, but one of the most prevalent roles is the role they play in sexual politics. The sex lives of celebrities are often made public through scandals. In his article “Normal Sins: Sex Scandal Narratives as Institutional Morality Tales”, Joshua Gamson explores the role sex scandals of celebrities play in society. Celebrity sex scandals usually do not focus on the sexual immorality of the act, but bring the institution involved under scrutiny. The sex scandals of Jimmy Swaggert, Hugh Grant and Dick Morris all demonstrate how the sex lives of celebrities play a role in sex politics. Jimmy Swaggert was a married T.V. evangelist who paid a prostitute to pose for him. The discovery of this brought about questions on Swaggert’s morality since he was a married man who participated in extramarital sex with a prostitute. While the scandal relates to sexual misbehavior and immorality, it brings about something even bigger. Swaggert was looked at as a hypocrite since he preached against the very sexual activities that he participated in. This hypocrisy led people to question the institution of T.V. evangelists in general. Hugh Grant’s sex scandal was slightly different. Hugh Grant received oral sex from a prostitute on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood. The scandal did not focus on the morality of oral sex with a prostitute; instead it focused on the disloyalty of Grant to his then girlfriend Elizabeth Hurley and his image as a celebrity. This sexual act went against the image that Hollywood made for him and caused people to question this image. Unlike Swaggert, Grant’s scandal helped his career and made him “a more typical Hollywood product” (Gamson 314). Dick Morris, an advisor to former president Bill Clinton, also had a scandal involving a prostitute. Morris (a married man) participated in sexual activities with a prostitute, whom he discussed politics with. Although he participated in extramarital sex, the media focused on his betrayal of the president instead of the betrayal of his wife. The story did not focus on the sexual norms in question, but on how this scandal would affect the president. This scandal lead the public to question the institution of government and politics. All of these scandals demonstrate how the private sexual activities of celebrities play a role in sexual politics. Each scandal demonstrates how sexual misbehavior or immorality can lead to the questioning of the morality of the institution involved.

Posted by hahnx136 at 6:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Politics and sex you don’t often hear one word without the other. For me the biggest political/sex scandal that I can hear of is Bill Clinton. He was president for many years and did some really good things while he was a president. The sad thing is that people do not remember those good things or how well liked he was. People only remember the horrible way that his presidency was ended with a sex scandal. People contemplate that if Clinton had told the truth then maybe things would have not ended so badly or if he chose to stay faithful to his wife things would have not ended badly. In his article Gamson says
“Perhaps the sparse sociological consideration of sex scandals can be attributed to their apparent transparency: they appear to be simply barometers of sexual moralities, moments in which a society reminds itself what is and is not acceptable sexual behavior by punishing with public humiliation and the risk of status loss, those highly visible people caught doing the unacceptable stuff ” (p.186).
This quote seems to encompass exactly what ended up happening with Bill Clinton. People felt such a strong connection to him that when the truth eventually came out people took it personally, as if Bill Clinton was sitting in their living room telling them exclusively that he did not engage in sex relations with his internship. There was such uproar because people had to think about their own moral values about sex and deal with the fact that the president went against those values therefore they needed to turn against him. To this day people cannot bring up Bill Clinton without saying a joke or taking a stab at his character based on that one action that he did all those years old. Every day he is reminded and humiliated by the fact that he made a mistake, loss his status and will forever be remembered as having sex with an intern.

Posted by Dorothee at 5:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Celebrities are often called upon to mediate sexual realities so that the public can better understand, and accept, what is happening. In the case of the AIDS epidemic, when it was revealed that AIDS wasn’t just a homosexual disease, but that heterosexuals (and thereby, everyone) was at risk of contracting it, it sent the public into an uproar. Fear and paranoia spread. A figure like Magic Johnson was desperately needed to make everything “ok.” Not only did he say that he was living with HIV, but he was going to do everything in his power to help “fix” the problem.
Stars can also have a huge impact on homosexuals being more readily accepted into society. The coming out of celebrities makes it so much easier for the average citizen to make their sexuality public because society sees that it’s “ok” for Ellen to be homosexual, and they still love her. Her coming out, if anything, improved her public image. She becomes a symbol for other homosexuals to look up to.
Unfortunately, stars can also be drawn into the sexual fantasies of everyday people. Because they receive so much publicity and are put up on a pedestal, stars can become icons for what is sexual. The thin female body becomes the standard, and the rugged, in shape body with well-defined muscles becomes the standard for the male. When stars are so iconic, people naturally wish to somehow embrace that power. That inexplicable quality that draws us to particular stars, that thing we cannot explain, creates a sexual desire on some level. What we wouldn’t give to spend a night with Brad Pitt, or Angelina Jolie?

Posted by lindb289 at 4:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I think that Britney Spears is a perfect example of a star that has had her triumphs and her failures but that has also allowed us to be proud of her and to also critique her. Britney Spears has so much charisma around her that we can’t stop watching her, even when she shaves her head and is in rehab for ages. This is an excellent example of the charisma that Dyer talks about. He states that “charisma is a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is ser apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman or at least superficially exceptional qualities”. Britney has something about her that makes us love her when she has the come-back of her life but not too long ago we were disgusted with the way she was handling her family life. Britney also has a very difficult time keeping the public-private binary separate. When you look at a tabloid and see Britney Spears, you usually don’t see her posing for professional photos. It’s usually scantily clad shot that one of 30 paparazzi managed to take of her driving with her baby on her lap. We were shocked when we heard she went on a secret rendezvous to Las Vegas to marry a guy that we knew nothing about. This is another reason we love to watch celebrities, they can easily “mess up” the sexual norms by doing things that none of us would ever imagine doing. Sometimes I think that we try to live through them and all of their glamour. Celebrities play a vital role in allowing us to experience sexuality, whether it be watching them, copying them or envying them.

Posted by reed0413 at 4:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I believe a celebrity’s fan base is the most powerful tool in forming their public image. The fans are especially relevant in the formation of a celebrity’s sexual image, and a celebrity’s sexual image is hugely influential on their fans. Without fans, celebrities would not be famous and without their fame, celebrities would not be making money. They need to do whatever it takes to build up an appeal to mass amounts of people. Once a celebrity achieves that fame and fortune they then have the power of changing their image to however they would really like to be perceived (within reason) and their fan base will most likely continue to follow and in turn begin to emulate what they see in the celebrity. To be a celebrity is to have ultimate power. With this power, celebrities are able to influence whomever they please. A common form of influence is sexual influence. Take the Disney actress/singer Miley Cyrus. Miley started out as a young, innocent, very pure actress on the Disney Channel-directed at ages mostly around 8-14 years. Miley created a massive fan base by adhering to socially accepted norms of a young girl her age, she dressed conservatively, she didn’t swear, she was never in the public doing anything inappropriate, she was the perfect role model for ‘tweens’ everywhere. After Miley secured these fans, she let loose by hanging around with older boys, taking scandalous photos that were released on the web, and dressing much more sexually. With the actions of Miley Cyrus taking a dramatic turn so have instances of young girls posting nude photos on the internet, ‘sexting’, and becoming more sexual at a younger age, maybe in part due to their loyalty to a celebrity such as Miley Cyrus. Catherine Lumby addresses these types of fans in her article ‘Doing It For Themselves? Teenage Girls, Sexuality and Fame.’ She talks about how a fans obsession with an idol can essentially control their self image (322). Not only do celebrities have a role in sex politics, they have the ability to control it.

Posted by windb002 at 2:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Sex. Politics. It is something that is displayed and played throughout our everyday media and we are exposed to it every minute of every day. Richard Dryer, in his essay: Stars and status quo, mentions certain points in which ‘normal people’ try to live up to or live through the stars that they see on the big screen. There are many things that are sold by using the ‘sex’ image; therefore, a lot of people mold themselves into what they see in order to try and compensate for something that they lack in their own lives. This is the first issue that Dryer sets forth about the sex in the media. He tries to make us aware of the fact that we love celebrities so much because they ‘mess up’ the sexual norms that would otherwise be frowned upon if the acts were played out by ‘normal people’. There are a select few people that will always rise above the social norms due to a certain type of characteristic that they have: charisma. This is another point that Dryer puts forth. He states that “charisma is a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is ser apart from ordinary men and treated as
endowed with supernatural, superhuman or at least superficially exceptional qualities”.

Sex and politics will always go hand in hand as long as we keep feeding and buying the images that sell it. If we were able to wash all of these figures away and just live every day to live, then I think that we would be able to move closer and closer to a more equality based society as a whole. This, of course, would only occur in a perfect world, which we all know will never happen.

Posted by kamxx006 at 10:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The roles celebrities play in culture go beyond those they play in movies. Stars have the unique ability to negotiate cultural and political ideologies; they can compensate us for things we cannot provide ourselves; and even their personal triumphs and failures give us the scripts by which we can understand/critique the world around us. Their ability to fulfill these other "roles" is not premised upon some mystical quality they innately possess; rather, celebrities are empowered by the "star system," a set of institutional, political, and material conditions that manufacture celebrity status. In turn, we invest in stars as much as they provide for us.

Given this, it is not surprising that stars often emerge to mediate sexual realities and even at times become incorporated into our own personal sexual dramas. In other ways, celebrity sex lives provide avenues for critiquing much larger social ills, as is usually the case with sex scandals. Reflecting on either of these themes, write a 250-300 word blog that explores the role(s) celebrities play in sex politics...

You may feel inspired by Gamson to talk about the role of celebrity sex scandal. You might take a page from Dyer to talk about the ways in which a certain celebrity negotiates/complicates a sex norm. You might even consider talking about the power fans have in the construction of a celebrity's sexual persona. Regardless of how you choose to argue, you will need to cite at least one text.

Posted by Katie Bashore at 3:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)