Today’s #TBT is dedicated to @piersmorgan. pic.twitter.com/InU7d6qhC0
— Susan Sarandon (@SusanSarandon) February 4, 2016
And this is how you respond to criticism LIKE A BOSS.
A couple of days ago, we told you that after Susan Sarandon appeared at the SAG Awards wearing a goddamn pants suit, there was a bunch of hullabaloo over the fact that she 1) was wearing a bra underneath her blazer sans shirt, 2) that she had the nerve to wear said outfit while participating in the In Memoriam portion of the evening, 3) that the outfit would’ve looked better with a better bra underneath, or 4) that she was “too old” to be dressing that way.
A. Goddamn. Pants. Suit. I love how most of her was covered up, but she got flack for the ONE area of skin we could see other than her face. (An above-the-waist part – I see you over there about to start mouthing the comment “What if she had a big hole where her butt is? Would THAT be ok?” Just…don’t even do it. Not the same thing. Revealing butts and genitals publicly is frowned upon universally – not so with women’s cleavage, and it’s in the double – and sometimes triple – standards that the problem lies.)
Anyway, one of the more high-profile opinions floating around the Twitterverse came from Piers Morgan. Sarandon responded with the above photo, and that should’ve been it, right? But Piers kept talking. (Like, seriously – why is it so important to you that people to be on your side about this?) First, with this gem from an old ad he did:
Today’s #TBT is dedicated to @SusanSarandon. pic.twitter.com/g8Wh6phMrA
— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) February 4, 2016
Then, he made sure Sarandon knows that, look, it’s not that your cleavage is unattractive. It’s just disrespectful. (But don’t worry, I still think you’re attractive, so you still have value! Isn’t that wonderful!):
Just for the record, @SusanSarandon, I think your cleavage is magnificent.
I’d just keep it hidden for “In Memoriam” tributes.
Love Piers x— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) February 4, 2016
And an explanation for the rest of us (seriously, though, why are you trying so hard?!):
Seems to be some massive misunderstanding that I am anti-cleavage.
I’m only anti-cleavage during In Memoriam tributes to dead people.— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) February 5, 2016
Then, when women continue to try to get through to him, explaining how is continuing to express his unsolicited opinion is actually perpetuating some harmful ideas about women, he goes there:
Oh Christ, knew it wouldn’t be long before the Jezebel feminazis stuck their lentils in. https://t.co/JLbj7OSHC8
— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) February 5, 2016
And goes full misogyny:
What other purpose could there possibly be in flaunting it? https://t.co/iqHqnPmyZP
— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) February 5, 2016
Here are the bees in my bonnet about all this:
An In Memoriam segment of an awards show is not a funeral!
I’m so tired of Morgan continually trotting this out as his main point. You’re dressing for an awards show when you dress for an awards show – even if you’re doing the In Memoriam segment. Because guess what? If you go to an awards show dressed like you’re going to a funeral – then you have to spend the entire rest of the evening dressed like you’re at a funeral! If Morgan is worried about “being respectful,” what about the fact that In Memoriam segments are generally sandwiched between the host’s comedic bits and various other shenannigans and followed by loud commercial breaks for the viewers at home.
David Bowie and the other actors being remembered weren’t being laid to rest at that moment. Sarandon wasn’t flaunting her cleavage over someone’s casket, fercryingoutloud. She was taking part in a segment at an awards show. Your sense of propriety is misplaced.
This wouldn’t have happened to a younger woman wearing the exact same outfit.
If any of the younger women – your Mara sisters, your Jennifer Lawrences – had been asked to deliver the In Memoriam bearing that much cleavage, if not more, better believe there would’ve been ZERO uproar about it. I’m sure Morgan is a fan of cleavage. He just thinks older cleavage is inherently disrespectful. Or something. But young flesh is always in season.
Women’s appearances are disproportionately scrutinized.
A lot of people have been saying something along the lines of “What if a man were delivering the In Memoriam segment shirtless? People would totally call that tacky.” Yes, they would. I hate to break it to these people, but first of all – there’s a difference between shirtless and bearing cleavage. Second, what’s hugely frustrating about all this is that, despite some people trying to force one, there is no male equivalent to this. Because women’s fashions have, throughout the ages, always been designed to make them visually pleasing to men.
Bustles – accentuate that silhouette by plumping up dat ass, girl! Corsets – accentuate that silhouette by crushing together dem organs, girl! High heels to make our legs look longer. Make-up to cover up our “flaws” even as men get to wear their blemishes and eye circles proudly (or, at least without being shamed for them). And, of course, the ever decreasing amount of fabric on fancy dresses as the times have changed. Women’s clothes are generally designed to be aesthetically pleasing through the lens of the straight male gaze. They’re designed for being seen.
Men’s clothes, on the other hand, have always been designed for doing. Their fashions allow for comfort and ease of movement, with the look coming in a distant second. Did you ever notice how most guys at awards shows tend to look the same? Now, I love tuxedos as much as the next person, and think every guy looks great in one….but that’s just it. I’ve been programmed over time to think that every guy looks great in one, because that’s all every guy ever wears when he dresses up. So you have a parade of black suits…and maybe the one guy who thinks about aesthetics and shows up in a purple or blue suit.
So, saying “What if a guy did…” is irrelevant, because it would never happen. There is no male equivalent for this. This was only ever talked about in the first place because Sarandon is a woman, and her “controversial” fashion choice is only a topic of discussion, because only women are held up for this much scrutiny when they wear anything.
Women who show their cleavage also have a right to mourn.
This is Jamie Lee Curtis at her father Tony Curtis’ actual funeral. Cleavage or a short skirt does not mean you’re not mourning, nor does it mean you’re not taking the events seriously. Sarandon was talking about a person with whom she’d had an actual relationship up there on that stage. This wasn’t an abstract segment for her. It’s not Piers Morgan’s, or anyone else’s job to tell someone how to mourn, or what to wear when doing so.
Love feminism, love women & love cleavages.
Just don’t love feminist hypocrisy. https://t.co/m315JNX27K— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) February 5, 2016
Clearly, Mr. Morgan, you’re incapable of understanding the myriad issues involved in the simple act of a woman dressing herself. The minefield that she steps into every day as she risks being called “slutty” or thought “not hot enough,” because the primary criterion for judging women is their appearance as men demand with their words, actions, and choices to have near-constant viewing privileges of female skin everywhere, but then reserve the right to reprimand them when it’s done in a way they don’t like. The reason all this discussion seems like “feminist hypocrisy” to you, is because the messages women get about how to look and dress are themselves contradictory and hypocritical, and we are doing the best we can to fight against that.
But these are clearly difficult concepts for you to grasp. That’s probably why you’ve always been such a crap journalist.
(via Pajiba)
—Please make note of The Mary Sue’s general comment policy.—
Do you follow The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?
