If you go to this website, you can buy the Smart Mudflap Girl. Please note that she's still quite buxom, but we never said we weren't interested in looks.
This is our kind of girl. We can only hope we're worthy.
This is our kind of girl. We can only hope we're worthy.
This seems like a good idea, but I am still not sure...it still seems to objectify women as an object. I'll have to think on it more.
ReplyDeleteI'd love to hear your thoughts. And I promise not to talk about reifying as a thing.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, I'd love to hear what you have to say. Any sort of archetype objectifies the individuals it represents, but is that necessarily bad?
I think an archetype necessarily has to simply an idea or a role, which may lead to objectification. I suppose the thing that I find a bit, well, niggling, is _where_ the mudflap girl goes, which communicates something about the owner of the vehicle. Not only is it a perfectly (and likely unattainable) idealized female image, It is at the bottom of the vehicle. It is below bumperstickers that present ideas or eye-catching phrases revealing information about the owner's ideals. There, the image is only useful to gather, well, mud. It goes along with that whole idea of women as something to be possessed and owned, not seen as another spiritual being. I suppose the way that I perceive the traditional mudflap girl would fall in the same vein as those men who view sex as a necessary urge and release and nothing more (i.e. a woman is like a toilet, just something to use and then leave).
ReplyDeleteWhen I first clicked over to the website, it seems that they don't actually sell mudflaps. I agree that mudflaps are in themselves offensive, for the same reasons you lay out. They sell stickers and decals. To a great degree what these do is point out how stupid and offensive real mudflap girls are.
ReplyDeleteYes, I would agree with you there, perhaps stickers aren't quite as bad. I don't think I would have one though.
ReplyDeleteI don't wish to be argumentative, but the origin of this symbol (the original mudflap girl) was on Tractor trailers where the mudflap was up nearly in the line of site of passing cars. (Truckers do love their chrome!) Since most drivers were/are males, a female symbol wouldn't necessarily have been meant to demean women. At it's first appearance, most weren't concerned or aware of the objectification, only the symbolism of a dream of femininity. (Just my opinion) It was, and still is, a lonely way to make a living. I do fully acknowledge and appreciate that you may take offense to the original symbol and by extension this new Mud Flap Girl. It is a step in the right direction and had to be close enough to evoke the connection to the original. I must say I like it. If I were still a trucker, I would opt for these over the originals. :-)
ReplyDeleteHi Greg, Thanks for your reply. I appreciate the improvement in the drawing, but whether or not the original creators were thinking of objectification, doesn't lessen the fact that it is. I am sure it is a lonely job, and would never want to do it. Do you really think it was the "dream of femininity" or the "ideal sexual object"?
ReplyDeleteI would have to admit it was probably more the ideal sexual object.
ReplyDelete