Poll: Glee In GQ Or Rachel Ray In FHM Pictures Worse?
Author: Mack Rawden
published: 2010-10-20 20:49:32
Like a few select parent groups, I am offended by the new Glee photo spread in GQ. Raunchy, slutty, sexually aggressive, bordering on pedophilia, these are the words the concerned parents of America are brandishing around like pompoms. Are the photos that explicit? Not really, but Iím still offendedÖ. because theyíre beyond tacky. Theyíre obvious, classless and overly forward about their attention-grabbing intentions. Itís one thing when a woman decides to break out of her asexual cocoon by showing a little leg, itís another thing altogether for a woman, or in this case women, to whore out the innocence of characters theyíre planning on continuing to play for attention. You wanna show off the goods in Maxim or even Playboy? Be my guest. Go ahead and do porn for all I care, but donít uncreatively exploit your image for a brief spot of attention. Youíll make yourself look like Rachael Ray.
Yes, thatís right, Americaís favorite chatty non-chef once involved herself in a photo shoot featuring chocolate and licked spatulas. Who tells these people these tacky, obvious displays of sexuality are good ideas? I donít get it. Itís like everyone involved reasons these pictures will be sexy if, and only if, they clearly and consistently reference whatever the celebrity is known for. It would be like if every Marilyn Monroe photo shoot involved her dress blowing up or every Victoria Beckham set had to include at least one soccer ball or a Spice Girls concert t-shirt.
And itís the same thing with this Glee photo spread. Every shot involves standing by a locker or ripping up paper in a classroom. Itís almost an insult to Lea Michele and Dianna Agron, like GQ thought, well, people might want to look at these ladies if we make it clear they play high schoolers on a popular television program. You see, itís not offensive because twenty-four year olds who play a teenager on television are being sexualized, itís offensive because itís devoid of creativity and incredibly tacky.
You know how every few years one of the contestants from Survivor poses naked in Playboy? Those pictures donít sell because men want to see them naked; they sell because men want to see someone from Survivor naked. No one, not even the staunchest member of the strictest parent group, is freaking out because a twenty-something pretty hot chick is dressing like a high schooler to turn men on in a racy photo spread. That happens every single day. Thereís entire genres of porn based off of this premise. In fact, the term ďbarely-legalĒ has entered the pop culture lexicon. No, people are freaking out about these new Glee pictures because these two women are exploiting an innocent character viewers have come to know in order to garner attention for themselves. Do they have the right to do it? Sure, theyíre a lot more than just barely-legal and capable of making their own decisions. This absolutely has the right to exist, itís just offensive because it stinks of obvious uncreativity, just as the Rachael Ray spread did.
So, whatís worse: Rachael Ray drizzling chocolate on her bare stomach in a desperate attempt to prove she can be sexy or two twenty-somethings parading around in skimpy outfits to exploit Americaís teenage fantasizes? Make the call and vote in our poll belowÖ
Which photo is worse?
Back to top