The cover story of the New York Times Magazine is all about Megan Fox, and the problems she (and her publicists) are having with her image, particularly the way she's perceived by women. The article can be found online in its entirety, and serves as an interesting addition to my defense of the bombshell pseudo-actress from earlier this year. I've met nary a woman who isn't bothered by Fox and the brand of sexuality that she seems to effortlessly exude, and while i 'get' that in a way she has been marketed as a validation of porn-queen trashiness, i still fail to see a reason why that reading is stamped on Fox herself instead of the men's magazines and internet fanatics who have created and perpetuated it. What sort of self-proclaimed feminists devote so much time and energy to the cattiness needed to tear down Megan Fox? Why is it that Megan Fox has had to capitalize on a persona in order to obtain temporary celebrity? Why is it that the gossip hounds and photogs aren't questioned when they objectify someone who is, in fact, a real person?
For me, and apparently the NYT, Fox acts as a signifier of some serious societal issues. I'm not interested in how pretty she is, whether or not she can actually act, or how ridiculous some of her claims are. What i am worried about is how she's been written off based on the superficial alone. It's one thing for me to say "i don't like Jessica Alba because she ruins almost every movie she touches (except Sin City)", it's another for me to say "i don't like Jessica Alba because she's a dumb slut who thinks she's hot shit". I know that I would act out and bite the head off of anyone who perceived me that way. Alarm bells, people, you should be hearing them.