The Kind of Thing That Makes Me Want to Give up and Hide Under the Bed

Scarlett Johansson is FAT.”

“She has a huge butt, a gut, a stupid tattoo, and she still wears a juvenile nose ring. If her work out plans calls for her to look like a pear, then it’s working.”

Apparently, the Hollywood Grind’s educational plans call for them to remain total fucking idiots.

(via Big Fat Deal)

Posted in Uncategorized

54 thoughts on “The Kind of Thing That Makes Me Want to Give up and Hide Under the Bed

  1. I read your title and skipped immediately to the picture and was trying to gfigure out why a really beautiful woman would make you feel like that and then I read the headline.

    You know, she does have a generous rear end. And it looks AMAZING in those shorts.

    Some people will never be happy with the bodies of other people. It makes me wonder how they feel about their own body.

  2. You know, she does have a generous rear end.

    Except, NOT EVEN. I mean, compared to other Hollywood women, sure. But SHE IS A TINY PERSON.

    ScarJo is curvy in the sense that, no matter what her “workout program” is, she will always be a pear. With teh boobies. Also sometimes known as a “classically beautiful hourglass figure.” (Not that I want to open THAT can of worms! ;) ) But seriously? HER BUTT IS TINY. It’s only big compared to her own waist, not compared to OTHER HUMAN BUTTS.

    And I think that’s an important distinction to make. Sorry for the yelling. :)

  3. OH NOES YOU ARE YELLING I GO CRY NOW!

    Ahem.

    Actually, I wasn’t comparing her butt to other human butts. I am REALLY bad at comparing pictures of people to each other when they are not in the same picture – I think a lot of people are which is why Jess originally thought we were body twins. She only had my pictures from which to judge and my body is mostly proportionate.

    The woman in that picture, for her body, has a generous butt.

    I don’t think she won the booty jackpot or anything, but, yeah. Pear shape. I say yay for it.

  4. So, like, this Hollywood Grind person is also obviously a shittacular judge of a person’s body composition based on photos. I can see looking at that and, from a person who has only every formulated their ideas about what women’s bodies should be based on photoshopped pictures, coming to the conclusion that her butt is out of proportion.

    It’s just a faulty conclusion on their part.

  5. Heh. I actually knew you meant that, TR — you’re the last person on earth I’d believe was accusing Scarlett Johansson of having a big ass. :) I just wanted to make sure that distinction was very, very clear for other readers.

  6. If that post was writen by a man, it was probably a guy who lives at home with mommy, has never had a girlfriend, and still has a poster of that hot female vulcan on his wall, who he has idealized in his mind as his perfect mate.

    And if it was a woman, one word, JEALOUS!

  7. No, I am such a dork — when I read Rose’s comment I wondered whether she meant T’Pol (from Enterprise) or Saavik (whose name I couldn’t remember, but I did remember that she was originally played by Kirstie Alley in ST2 and replaced by a different actress (whose name I can’t remember, but she looks nothing like Kirstie Alley) for the next two movies).

    Incidentally, don’t knock Trekkies. :(

  8. I didn’t get to watch much of Enterprise, so I have only vague recollections of T’Pol. I originally thought of T’Pring but figured that might actually be too obscure because I couldn’t remember any posters that were made of her. But Seven of Nine really was held up as a sex symbol, so I assumed it would be her.

  9. Also, I’m not about to knock Trekkies sinc eI obviously am one. I don’t think Rose was meaning Trekkies particularly, either – it’s just the geek stereotype that totally gets thrown around. It’s like all geeks are supposed to be the comic book guy from the Simpsons. And while I’m sure there ARE people like that, I just don’t think they are all that common – nor are they all geeks.

  10. Rotund, as something of a girl geek myself (did you know I have every season of Buffy and Angel on DVD?) I understand them all too well!

    Chicken Girl – not sure which vulcan, or even if she is a vulcan. She’s a sexy blonde gal named Jeri, umm, well, her first name is Jeri, can’t remember the last! I think she was on Enterprise, but I’m not sure.

    Hmmmm, I guess that reponse shows I’m not THAT good a girl geek, especially with Star Trek through the ages stuff. I still like the original with Lenord Nimoy! And I never knock Trekkies! Just obnoxious fan-boy geeks who put down women on the internet but couldn’t in a million years ever talk to one in person!

  11. Jeri Ryan, and her husband takes her to sex clubs and then tries to run for office. I may not be a Trekkie, but I am a professional news geek.

  12. But if you think this is just a sterotype that gets thrown around, go read the comment section on Ain’t It Cool News. I mean any of their comment sections.

    Lots of comments like “Kirsten Dunst is FUGLY! She should fix her ugly crooked teeth and lose some weight. She’s a COW!” and many other posts to that effect. You need a strong stomach to do it. It’s nasty, sexist stuff. Those are the guys I was specifically refering to, actually, and I am sorry if I insulted Trekkies in the process. Nobody who’s a Buffy fanatic like me has any right to put down obessive love of a television show!

  13. Scarlett Johansson fits into that narrow and stifling culturally acceptable mold better than 95 percent of all American women. I think the writer ought to readjust his seriously skewed sense of perception.

  14. /delurk/

    Should’ve known. Looked at the pic first and thought “Is that Scarlett Johansen looking so chill, comfy and not like she has to be all fake and posed 100% of the time? Awesome!” and of course someone’s mocking her weight.

    Personally, I think she has a stunning figure but that’s not even the point. Now we know: any female person, no matter how young, famous, attractive, wealthy, blah blah blah, is going to get F***ed by the Fickle Finger of Fat Hatred if she’s seen in public doing anything but floating around weightlessly like Tinkerbell in a bikini…

  15. Thanks, Chicken Girl. My best friend since jr. high school, Merrill, can actually give stardate numbers for the episodes! So when I say some of my best friends are Trekkies, I ain’t kidding!

  16. Hi, Rose – y’know the “buff” part of my nome-de-plume?

    Nuff said.

    Also I caught the front page of some tacky magazine doing my weekly trek to the supermarket last week, and there were words to the effect of, “Hollywood flabbergasted. Scarlet’s put on 10lbs!!!!” My eyes nearly rolled out of my head.

  17. Just when I thought I couldn’t love this blog any more, I find Trekkies! NORMAL Trekkies.

    And yes, they do exist. Grin.

    As for the picture, I can’t believe how warped views of women’s bodies are. Have you ever watched old re-runs of almost any 90s sitcoms? Women who were considered thin in the 90s would hardly go outside today. Gross and Sad that that is the case. How much thinner can people get?

  18. Re: Celebrity women in the 90’s
    I recently watched the movie version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer (I’m totally a Buffy — TV show — dork), and Kristy Swanson would absolutely be considered Hollywood fat now. There would be articles all about how “curvy” she is and people dogging her for being a “cow” on the internets. But, at the time? She was pretty much the ideal.

  19. Pingback: Top Posts « WordPress.com

  20. Ahhh, but AnotherKate, lest you forget, Tink had some serious hip action going on and had a fantastic hourglass figure, but that hip action would have people talking about how she’s not aerodynamically sound and how OMGFAT she is.

  21. Think about it though, it is her JOB to be a good actress (well, decent anyway-the looks are more important), pretty face, sexy body, and a certain size. thats just how hollyweird is. I mean, you wouldnt employ a itsy bitsy girl to lift fifty-pd boxes, right? Shes getting paid to be a certain size. I think people need to accept that beautiful people will never be “the average size,” because they have to be better than average all the time.

    That being said, I hate those shorts. Highwaist is blah. Mid to low-rise is normal and great. The high-rise thing will last three more months, im tellin ya right now

  22. Hello, what you’re saying isn’t lost on me. But the point here is A) she IS both uncommonly beautiful and very thin but has a naturally curvy shape that (trust me) she could not diet or exercise away; this does not make her anything remotely close to “fat,” and B) for the record, very thin is not “better” than average… it’s just thinner.

    Also, if you don’t think high waists can last as a trend, you must not be old enough to remember the ’80s. And early ’90s.

  23. Seeing stuff like that makes me so sad. If celebrities, who are supposedly the images of beauty we’re supposed to emulate can’t reach the socially acceptable standard of beauty, then there’s no hope for us “regular” people.

  24. Man if people don’t leave the Scarlett Jo. alone. I wonder what kind of crap they say about Queen Latifah? Just let a woman enjoy her body, curves and all.

  25. They’re fucking crazy. Scarlett is probably the second-hottest female celebrity out there (the top two being the fabulously sexy Mariska Hargitay and the adorable, talented Kelly Clarkson). Yes, her butt is big compared to her waist. She’s still tiny–and besides, curves are far more attractive than sticks.

  26. Hello: she is an actress. Last time I checked her job was to act. There are many different types of people in the world and many different stories to portray. It is by no means the job of an actor to be skinny and beautiful. If they are telling the story of someone who is skinny and beautiful, then yes, it is their job, but if they are telling a different story they need to fit those requirements.

    I see what you’re saying, but acting should be as diverse as the world, IMO, as that is what it should be trying to represent. Hollywood may be the way it is, but that doesn’t mean we need to accept it and celebrate it.

  27. Loffle I think you’ll find, Nikki Blonsky notwithstanding, it is also the job of the thin and beautiful® to play lumpy and/or plain people through the miracle of strategically placed spectacles and a fat suit. Gives ‘em a chance to flex their Method muscles and empathise with the common folk, don’t you know.

  28. Buffpuff: for some reason it reminds me of Cameron Diaz saying that unattractive/plain actresses are never asked if they think their looks get them ahead, when attractive actresses are all the time. She said it in a “poor me, I can’t help being beautiful” way too…

    I wish it wasn’t the case, but of course you’re right. Hollywood loves a fatsuit (all the better for those transformation movies, where the weight is lost/the make-up is applied and hey presto girl has boy)!

  29. Good luck even finding a plain/unattractive person in Hollywood! There’s probably an exclusion zone, or maybe you have to purchase a special Ugly Visa which precludes you from visiting mainstream studios.

    Actors’ lives were so much simpler when all the leading man had to do was whip off a pair of specs, yank out a couple of hairpins and breathe, “But Miss Smith… you’re beautiful!!” Gets hot inside those fat suits, y’know.

  30. Good luck even finding a plain/unattractive person in Hollywood!

    Well, it’s like ScarJo being “fat”–“ugly” Hollywood people are like America Ferrerra. Won’t someone shield my eyes!!!!

  31. “for the record, very thin is not “better” than average… it’s just thinner.”

    But thas what im saying-in Hollywood, ppl consider thinner people more attractive; thats just hollyweird.

    “If celebrities, who are supposedly the images of beauty we’re supposed to emulate”

    Again, celebs are not images of beauty we are supposed to emulate- they are supposed to be the most attractive and “sexy” (not really) people society has to offer. Thats why these thinspo sites are so sad, because barely anyone will ever look like those celebs-the’re untouchable.

    This is not really to excuse hollyweirds behavior, but I think its important to realize how hollywood works and why we shouldnt aim to look like celebs; simply put, because we cant. And once people can accept that, they can accept their bodies.

    Also, I think it would be good kate to put a photo retouching gallery on your site to show just how far one person can be taken and changed- just to let people know that no one is THAT perfect, and that we should be able to accept who we are.

  32. Loffle: Hollywood places little value on talent anymore. It may be their job to act, but its more important to be eye candy to all the pervs masturbating in the crowd. Its the industry, and it sucks that whats really important should be the LEAST important thing…but thats just how it is now

  33. She is gorgeous. But those shorts don’t do her justice.

    I don’t usually feel too sad for rich, beautiful celebs, but it must be very hard having millions of eyes trained on your figure.

  34. Huh. When I look at those pictures, it looks to me like her shoulders are still wider than her hips. Funny-looking pear shape, if you ask me. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that).

    I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to have one of her “bad” looks days.

  35. “Some people will never be happy with the bodies of other people. It makes me wonder how they feel about their own body.”

    I believe that this, along with CAMERA DISTORTION – -which I think the Hollywood-watching-obsessed tend to forget about on the regular (I’ve met, for example, Norah Jones, and although she looks average-size-gorgeous on camera, she is diminutive tiny tiny – although still gorgeous – in person) – – is the entire point.

  36. Oh, and Robin Curtis played Saavik after Kirstie Alley.

    Jeri Ryan played Seven of Nine.

    Bonus question: Which Sex in the City vixen played the bada** Vulcan Valeris?

    (Yes, I have both my Trekker Pass and my Ugly Visa. You’re allowed on set as long as you’re not caught on camera.)

  37. Personally, I think these kind of moronic opinions are a blessing in disguise. They show just how absurd we are. It also illustrates misogyny. ANY female curves offend the powers that be. Part of it is greed, the more people labeled fat, the more diet products sold. But it is also about hatred for the female body. It should make ALL women wake up! Just because they are not labeled “obese” doesn’t mean antifat hysteria can’t hurt them!

    p.s. I can’t read any comments due to a bad browser. So I hope I am not saying the identical thing someone else just said.

    “He who judges you by the size of your rear keeps his own brains there.”

  38. That just rips. I look to her as the realistic beauty among even now Miss Jolie in all her lolipop head glory! Why are we going back to the late 90s early 00s LOLIPOP head acceptance?! Scarlett Johansson represented curves again. Made/makes everyone embrace the lovely that is our hips!!! I was just thinking about that last week when I saw one of her movies on IFC…
    What a joke this celebrity media shit has become…

  39. I don’t get it. I think Jennifer Aniston is a beautiful woman. She seems beautiful to the core which is where true beauty exudes from. As with Jennifer Aniston, I think Queen Latifa is just as beautiful. They both have different body types but they are both just as beautiful. I guess I’m missing the “beef” when it comes to who is fat, who is not fat.

    Why is she fat, why is she skinny? Look at that ass, it belongs on a cow, or look at her chest, does she even have one? When are people going to get it….it is US… the “commoners” in most respect that state what beauty is and is not.

    I think Sly Stone said it pretty good when he said “different strokes for different folks.”

    My dream is that my children will think I am a beautiful person, whether I’m fat, skinny, or in between.

  40. Hello and buffpuff – we’re on the same page, I think. I expressed myself poorly…I just don’t think we should lie down and accept these things, but support movies and art outside Hollywood etc. I think you’d probably agree – I’m sorry if I came off sounding, welll, like an idiot!

  41. loffle/laurel, I think you expressed yourself just fine. And if I were the type of person to say, “Well, that’s just the way things are — you’d better accept it!” this blog wouldn’t exist. :)

    And to Hello, the concept of “aspirational” images is big in women’s magazines and marketing; I’m sure the same goes for Hollywood. We are indeed meant to emulate these women.

    We don’t have to do it, and I’d love to see all women reject that standard, but you’re crazy if you think we’re supposed to look at them as images of unattainable beauty and go on about our merry way. We’re supposed to look at their beauty as just out of reach, then keep working and working — and more importantly buying and buying — in a Sisyphean effort to get that beautiful.

Comments are closed.