Recently I read an article in the smh about the (old-but-new) fashion logo
original synonomous with hugh hefner and playboy - the author (a woman)
was discussing whether or not the recurrence of this logo on all sorts of (often
teenage) female apparel was
a: a reversion to women-as-objects-of-desire
b: a post-feminist assertion of a woman's right to choose
Her (suspected and muted) conclusion seemed to be b:
Whilst I would agree that individual women might be 'choosing with their fashion dollar'
I am suspicious as to whether this is really a liberated choice at all...
Especially when I read the following article about marriage and celebrity... sure
the woman choose their dress (and everything else) - but the choice seems
to be dictated through hollywood...
anyway, have a read niall
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/30/1075340841216.html
------------------------------------------------------ - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm ------------------------------------------------------
