controversy

2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup: Group E Focus

Jon The Blogcentric4 Comments

I’m sure that when some of you hear me talk about a controversy about this World Cup, it’s about the recent bombshell about the arrests of FIFA members. It’s not. I’m going to save that for another blog just like I’m saving the topic of women’s football for a separate blog. In this blog, here’s my review of Group E with another stadium focus and another issue focus:

GROUP E:

Spain Fixed-Spain (14): This will be Spain’s first Women’s World Cup. Spain’s women are relatively inexperienced to  major competition. They’ve never played in an Olympics before either. Nevertheless ‘La Roja’ do have some accolades like a third-place finish at the 1997 Women’s Euro and a quarterfinals finish at the last one in 2013. They’ve also had an impressive play record in the past two years with only a single loss to Norway in 2013 and wins against Italy, the Czech Republic and Belgium. Spain may just be a future power in women’s football.

Brazil-Brazil (7): When women’s football started making a name for itself in the 1990’s, it was North America and Asia that were the leaders. Countries from South America and most European countries still thought of football as strictly a man’s game and had lackluster women’s teams to show for it. Since then the continents have been taking women’s football more seriously. If there’s one country that has shown the most progress, it’s Brazil.

The Brazilian men without a doubt have the biggest legacy of any football country. The Brazilian women have really made strides to become one of the best in the world these last 15 years. They were finalists at the 2007 World Cup and achieved 3rd place in 1999. They also have two Olympic silver medals and have won the Copa America Feminina all but once. They even produced a player that can be called ‘The Female Pele,’ Marta, with five FIFA Women’s World Player Of The Year awards.

Even though Brazil has become one of the best in the last couple of decades, they still have some noticeable ‘weak spots.’ For starters, they’ve never won against England or France. Secondly, they lost to Germany twice this year. Nevertheless Brazil has been impressive these past twelve months. They’ve ties the U.S. and they’ve had wins against China, Sweden and Switzerland. Canada will be both another proving point for Brazil and a learning experience for Rio 2016.

Costa Rica-Costa Rica (37): Another of the two debut teams of this Group E. True, Costa Rica have never played in a world Cup or an Olympics before but they are a team whose cred is growing slowly but surely. They’ve been impressive during the CONCACAF Women’s Gold Cup with three semi-final finishes and were finalists at the last one in 2014.Despite their lack of experience on the world stage, they do have a promising team with four players playing for either American professional teams or American colleges.

I know I’ve talked a lot about countries here to learn. We shouldn’t forget women’s football is still growing, especially in continents where play has been denied a lot in the past. We should keep in mind Costa Rica is the first Central American country to qualify for the Women’s World Cup. Like the other ‘learning’ teams, Costa Rica really has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Korea-South Korea (18): South Korea’s men are the tops of Asian countries in football. South Korea’s women have long been relegated to second-fiddle to China and Japan but they’re seeking to improve over the years. They’ve never qualified for an Olympics and they’ve made only one previous World Cup appearance back in 2003. However they have some accolades of their own like four semi-final finishes at the AFC Asian Cup and bronze medals at the last two Asian Games.

Their play has been 50/50 this year as they beat Russia and tied Belgium but lost to Canada and Scotland. 2015 should help boost the team for a brighter future.

MY PREDICTION: I predict Brazil to win Group E with South Korea coming in second. Third-place was a tough prediction. I predict Spain, based on their experience. Mind you anything can happen.

STADIUM SPOTLIGHT

-EDMONTON: Commonwealth StadiumEskimos

Year Opened: 1978

World Cup Capacity: 56,302

World Cup Groups Hosting: A,C,D

Additional World Cup Matches Contested: Round of 16, Quarterfinal, Semifinal, Third-Place

The Stadium was opened in 1978 in time for the Commonwealth Games Edmonton hosted. Since then it has served as the venue for the Edmonton Eskimos football team and occasionally the FC Edmonton soccer team. The Stadium is the biggest of the six hosting matches for the FIFA World Cup which explains why Canada’s first two Group Stage matches will be held here. The stadium has undergone two renovations: the first in 2001 in time for the World Athletic Championships which included a new scoreboard, an enlarged concourse and a new track. The second in 2008 which experienced a reconfiguration and a turf replacement. Outside of their main sports teams, the stadium has hosted many concerts and has also hosted many soccer friendlies for both Canada’s men’s and women’s teams.

THE TURF ISSUE

The World Cup may be building in excitement but hard to believe a year ago there was a controversy brewing with threats of boycotts. The reason was because all six stadiums will be using some form of artificial turf. why does it matter? Many believe artificial turf makes players more prone to injuries. 50 players protested the use of turf on the basis of gender discrimination. Seems odd to me to think that getting them to play on turf is a form of discrimination. Keep in mind it’s FIFA regulation that the men’s World Cup matches all be contested on grass.

There was even a lawsuit claiming FIFA would never have the men play on ‘unsafe’ artificial turf and is a violation of the Canadian Human Rights Charter. The suit filed in October 2014 in Ontario even pointed how FIFA demanded stadiums in the United States to replace the artificial turf with grass even if it meant extra millions in expenses. The lawsuit had supporters like Tom Hanks, Kobe Bryant and U.S. men’s team goalkeeper Tim Howard. FIFA’s head of women’s competitions Tatjana Haenni made it firm: “We play on artificial turf and there’s no Plan B.” The lawsuit was eventually dropped in January of this year. All the stadiums have kept the turfs they had.

Despite its firm stance, FIFA has not hesitated to discuss the issue. In fact FIFA.com did an interview with Professor Eric Harrison. Harrison, who was assigned by FIFA to inspect the pitches of the six stadiums between September 29th to October 8th of last year, was given a Q&A about his findings, the various football turfs and even injury rick. He gave his answers on why Canadians stadiums have artificial turf (Canada’s extreme weather conditions), the various turfs classified by FIFA and if there’s any difference int he frequency of injury (Harrison claims there’s no real difference). For the complete interview, click here.

And there you go. My focus on Group E and bonuses. That only means one last group to review. Coming Sunday.

WORKS CITED:

FIFA.com Staff. “Harrison: Football Turf is Integral to Canada 2015” FIFA.com. 23 October 2014<http://www.fifa.com/womensworldcup/news/y=2014/m=10/news=harrison-football-turf-is-integral-to-canada-2015-2461003.html>

WIKIPEDIA: 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup. Wikipedia.com. 2015. Wikimedia Foundation Inc.<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_FIFA_Women%27s_World_Cup>

No Real Controversies In Music Nowadays. Just Excuses.

Jon The BlogcentricLeave a comment

I’ll admit these controversies happened months ago.  Nevertheless I feel it’s still worth pointing out since  both topics still stimulate excitement amongst the young and both songs are still in the US Top 40.

You may have remembered that over the past four or so months there was a load of controversy over two happenings in the music business. One was Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” in terms of its lyrics. Another was the performance of Miley Cyrus at the MTV Video Music Awards. Both were good at causing controversy in its time. But both wouldn’t have raised an eyebrow say twenty or even ten years ago.

 THICKE AND THIN

Robin Thicke in the unrated video fir 'Blurred Lines.' Both the song and video raised eyebrows in 2013.
Robin Thicke in the video for ‘Blurred Lines’ featuring a model in a flesh-colored suit. Both the song and video raised eyebrows in 2013.

First up is some controversy actually caused by music. This was courtesy of Robin Thicke and his song ‘Blurred Lines.’ which featured rappers Pharrell and T.I. The biggest controversy came from the video. There were two videos shot: one with the three models topless (which were actually flesh-colored G-strings) and the other with them covered. The topless version was first banned from Youtube but then restored albeit flagged as inappropriate for minors. There were even lewd messages like: “Robin Thicke has a big dick.” in the unrated version. My own problem with the video was seeing all those annoying hashtags.

Robin later commented on the controversy of the video: “We tried to do everything that was taboo. Bestiality, drug injections, and everything that is completely derogatory towards women. Because all three of us are happily married with children, we were like, ‘We’re the perfect guys to make fun of this.'”  Once again, the sexist-or-satire debate came up. I’m sure all three wives, especially Paula Patton, would have their own things to say about it.

Then there were the lyrics of the song. One lyric–“I know you want it”– hinted to many of date rape, especially at many universities in the UK. The first shout came from the University Of Edinburgh and at least twelve other UK universities followed in the ban. Thicke would later defend the song, declaring the song was about his wife (actress Paula Patton), and that after 20 years together, he indeed knew she wanted it from him. Once again, the fact that the three of them were married came up in the debate.

This proved to be the most controversial song of the decade and the first in years to stir up debate. The song has hit #1 in eighteen countries including Canada, Germany, France and even the UK. In the United States, it spent twelve weeks at #1 on the Hot 100 and became the first song of the decade to do so. The song currently sits at #31 on the Hot 100.

Oh, the song has also sparked a lawsuit from Thicke after the surviving relatives accused the writers of copying the ‘sound’ and ‘feel’ of ‘Got To Give It Up.’ I find it funny because I thought it was trying to capture the ‘sound’ of ‘Stuck In The Middle With You.’

MILEY GONE VILEY

Miley Cyrus really took full advantage of the good-girl-gone-bad gimmick this year by first twerking with Robin Thicke at the VMAs...
Miley Cyrus really took full advantage of the good-girl-gone-bad gimmick this year by first twerking with Robin Thicke at the MTV VMAs…

Miley Cyrus has been a star in entertainment since 2006 when her Disney channel show Hannah Montana won over young girls nationwide and made Miley a star. The success of the show also helped start her music career. However it was later years when she tried getting records released as Miley Cyrus that she tried to disassociate herself from her former Hannah Montana label.

It wasn’t until this very year that she finally did away with her former Hannah Montana label. But in a way that made tons of news. Not surprisingly it was at the MTV Video Music Awards of this year. Surprisingly, it was along Robin Thicke with his performance of ‘Blurred Lines.’ But before Robin, Miley performed her song ‘We Can’t Stop’ in a teddy bear attire. Then once Robin performed ‘Blurred Lines,’ Miley stripped down to a skin-colored latex two-piece outfit, touched Thicke’s crotch with her foam finger and then twerked against his crotch. Twerking was already the sexually-charged dance fad of 2013 that was already getting a lot of talk but it’s there where it got it’s peak.

...and then by swinging naked on a wrecking ball in the video of 'Wrecking Ball.' It all paid off in giving her best record sales ever.
…and then by swinging naked on a wrecking ball in the video of ‘Wrecking Ball.’ It all paid off in giving her best record sales ever.

The reactions were angry and they came from all sides: viewers and musical guests. Many felt her actions were distasteful. The incident set a Twitter record as the ‘most Tweeted’ event in history with 360,000 tweets in a single minute. News and social media sites published articles to do about parental concern. The incident was even considered responsible for Australian actor Liam Hemsworth to break off his engagement to Miley. Even Gloria Steinem was questioned about it, asked if that incident is setting the women’s movement back. Miley responded to the flack: “They’re overthinking it. You’re thinking about it more than I thought about it when I did it.” My feelings were as I saw it: either sleaze-for-chart-topping’s-sake or cashing in on the good-girl-gone-bad image. Her response did little to quell the controversy. Cyrus even received a letter from Sinead O’Connor warning her about the music industry and what it could do to her. To which, Cyrus gave a bratty response where she even brought up O’Connor’s psychotherapy.

Whatever the situation, it did nothing to quell Cyrus’ record sales. “We Can’t Stop” hit #2 and her album Bangerz debuted at #1. Further Cyrus controversy came with the release of her second single ‘Wrecking Ball.’ The video consisted of images of her swinging naked on a wrecking ball and licking a sledge-hammer. Sure it was your typical sleaze-for-sales-sake–I dare anyone with half a brain in their head to describe how those images are ‘artistic qualities’– but it paid off as it became Miley’s first ever #1 hit in the US. Just when you thought sleaze-for-sales-sake eemed to be fading, we’re reminded that the good-girl-gone-bad image is still a hot chart-topper. For those that care, ‘Wrecking Ball’ is now at #20 on the Hot 100 with the follow up song ‘Adore You’ climbing up the charts and sitting at #30 right now.

MUCH ADO ABOUT LITTLE

As you can tell, the controversies have sparked a lot of news and a lot of talk. There’s just one problem. They both pale in comparison to musical controversies of the past. I know because I’ve seen decades of musical controversies come and go. In fact I even saw VH-1’s countdown of the 100 Most Shocking Moments In Rock ‘N Roll. Here’s a refresher of the Top 10 most shocking for those who forgot:

  1.  John Lennon Assassinated (1980)
  2. Michael Jackson Accused Of Child Molestation (1993)
  3. Altamont Concert Ends In Tragedy (1969)
  4. Kurt Cobain Commits Suicide (1994)
  5. Marvin Gaye Jr. Shot To Death By Father (1984)
  6. The Who’s Cincinnati Concert Marred By A Tragic Stampede (1979)
  7. Milli Vanilli: Girl You Know It’s Fake (1990)
  8. Woodstock 1999: Where There’s Smoke…There’s And End To Peace ‘N Love
  9. Sinead O’Connor Disses The Pope On SNL (1992)
  10. The Beatles: Bigger Than Jesus Boast (1966)

I don’t have the energy to list #11 to #100 but you would be able to see how legendary a lot of those shocking moments are. Even though the list was compiled back in 2001, you can be sure there are few controversies since that could be worthy of a spot on the list, should it be revamped. My best bets for replacements would be Metallica vs. Napster (2000-2002), Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl Exposure (2004), Lil Kim Big Liar (2004), Britney’s Divorce Outbursts (2007) and Phil Spector Guilty Of Murder. Outside of that, little else. Don’t forget the list came right after the 90’s when shocking moments were left, right and centre. We all remember how infamous acts from rappers like Snoop Dogg’s alleged gang-style murder participation that launched his stardom in 1993. Or Death Row manager Suge Knight’s menacing, even gang-style, methods of doing business. Or even the murders of Tupac Skakur and The Notorious B.I.G. that turned them from star rappers into rap legends. So it’s obvious that Miley’s incidents are not necessarily anything that will take shock to new levels nor are they anything too new. They’re just simply the shock of the moment that simply gets a lot of press. Nothing new or revolutionary. Just the stuff stealing the show and the headlines.

‘Blurred Lines’ isn’t much in terms of shock material as it happens. It’s not as controversial as say the lyrics on Enimem records back from 1999 to 2002: lyrics that causes censorship discussions and lawsuits from those people that felt slandered. Must I say they were lyrics that fueled Eminem’s superstardom and made him a hero to the young back then and a legend to his time.

Neither is ‘Blurred Lines’ as controversial as say the lyrics of rap group 2 Live Crew in their 1989 album ‘As Nasty As They Wanna Be.’ Those lyrics were nasty enough to be taken to a court in Broward County and judged obscene. The 2 Live Crew fought the obscene conviction and won. The court cases rewrote the book on record censorship and paved the way for more explicit and irresponsible lyrics from gangsta rap records to be released and sell like hotcakes for many years. If you want to dig deeper into lyrics controversy, ‘Blurred Lines’ doesn’t even contain the same shock elements as many disco records like the simulated orgasms heard in Donna Summer’s ‘Love To Love You Baby’ or Sylvester’s ‘You Make Me Feel Mighty Real.’ Nor does ‘Blurred Lines’ cause the same controversy as say the ‘Filthy Fifteen’: fifteen explicit songs labeled ‘filthy’ by the Tipper Gore-led ASPCA back in 1985 and would pave the way for warning stickers on records. It doesn’t even have the same shock value as say the psychedelic songs of the late-60’s, early 70’s that reference drugs and illicit sex. And those songs came just as the counterculture was starting to happen and the older generation were frustrated of what to make of it. Just to put it plainly if you released ‘Blurred Lines’ as little as say ten years ago or even during the disco days of the 70’s, you’d have young people labeling the song as boring because of its lack of shock value and its video not full enough of scantily clad women. Just like Miley’s twerking, ‘Blurred Lines’ was a case of a controversy pale in comparison to music controversies past but was able to own the spotlight at the right time.

It’s no secret that controversy has made many a music career. Miley’s and Robin’s controversies were pretty tame compared to music controversies of the past. Nevertheless they were the right controversies at the right time to steal the show and make their records top the charts. As for me, all it does is make me glad to be old.

The Rob Ford Fiasco

Jon The BlogcentricLeave a comment
Rob Ford, always a controversial figure, faces his biggest controversy thanks to Gawker.
Rob Ford, always a controversial figure, faces his biggest controversy thanks to Gawker.

Most of you outside of Canada or even Ontario have a bit of an idea about the Rob Ford fiasco happening there but aren’t too clear who Rob Ford is. Us Canadians on the other hand can’t walk away from it. It’s here, it’s there, it’s everywhere. But what is it and why should it matter for all of Canada? Even for a Vancouverite like myself?

NOTE: I’m sure there are many Torontonians and Ontarians that will find my article too simple. Fact is I have many followers from around the world. The point is to explain the situation to those who don’t know who Rob Ford is and what the fiasco is about. Besides I’m from Vancouver so I’m not all too familiar with Rob Ford myself.

Rob Ford was elected mayor of Toronto back in 2010 and assumed office in December of that year. He was a Toronto City Councilor for Etobicoke North the previous ten years. Rob comes from a political family with his father owning the business DECO Labels And Tags (which Rob, his mother, and his other three brothers direct) and a former Member of Provincial Parliament and his brother Doug Jr. has assumed the role of Etobicoke North City Councilor upon Rob’s election of Mayor of Toronto. He’s a huge favorite of popular hockey voice Don Cherry who was at his mayoral inauguration in a pink suit.

Ask any Torontonian and they will tell of Ford’s controversial politics as mayor. At his best, he’s against excessive government spending and calls for the ‘end of the gravy train’. At his worst, he will make opposition to policies leaning more to the left much to the chagrin of many Torontonians. He’s been long known for voicing his opinions leaning towards the right, much to the annoyance of a highly liberal city like Toronto. However it’s been his attitude and his outspoken comments and actions that had already made Ford notorious even before the whole recent Crack-smoking scandal. Having his own talk radio show on Toronto air waves may have something to do with it. As for his political verbal outbursts and such, hmmm, where do I start:

  • In 2002 he got into a fight with fellow councilor Giorgio Mammoliti and called him a “Gino-boy”, leading him to charges of racism.
  • In June 2006, he spoke out against a city donation of $1.5 million to prevent AIDS by responding: “If you’re not doing needles and you’re not gay, you wouldn’t get AIDS probably.”
  • In March 2007, Ford made comments about cyclists use of roads saying: “Roads are built for buses, cars and trucks, not for people on bikes. My heart bleeds for them when I hear someone gets killed, but it’s their own fault at the end of the day.”
  • In March 2008 he said at a council meeting: “Those Oriental people, they work like dogs. They work their hearts out. They are workers non-stop. They sleep beside their machines. That’s why they’re successful in life. I’m telling you, the Oriental people, they’re slowly taking over.”
  • He’s been involved in many publicized incidents while driving including reading and talking on his cellphone.
  • He asked city officials to approve drainage and road repairs outside the DECO Labels And Tags headquarters before it’s 50th anniversary party in August 2012.
  • He was accused by CBC political comedian Mary Walsh for saying the F-word during one of her impromptu interviews with him.
  • In May 2012, he was accused by news reporter Daniel Dale of cornering him and threatening to punch him. He’s frequently referred to journalists as ‘scumbags.’
  • Even a month ago, he blurted out the F-word after accidentally being hit in the face by a camera. It was caught on camera and was shown on The Jimmy Kimmel Show.

Okay now you know what he’s like as a reckless politician. Now to see where all this crack-smoking fits in. Ford has had his brush with substances. He was arrested in 1999 in Miami for DUI and marijuana possession during his mayoral campaign. In 2006, Ford was accused of getting drunk at a Toronto Maple Leafs game and verbally assaulting the couple in front of him. In March 2013, former mayoral candidate Sarah Thomson accused Ford of touching her inappropriately and even suggested in a radio interview he was on cocaine. Even a Toronto City Councilor ask Ford to leave a function two weeks later because he appeared intoxicated.

Hard to believe all this that happened was just a forerunner to the ultimate, thanks to the website Gawker. Gawker claimed they had a video of Ford smoking crack cocaine from a Toronto Star reporter taken from a smartphone. Gawker said it appeared to show Ford in a clearly lit room although they also claim they can’t verify the authenticity of the video. Gawker even claimed the reporter asked for $200,000 for release of the video. Fact or fiction, the news sparked a heatwave of debate and talk all over Toronto. The heat could have come either because there’s so much opposition towards Rob Ford in Toronto or since it comes on the tails of another Canadian political scandal: senator Mike Duffy’s resignation after an expense controversy. Even Ford got into the act by claiming that the video is not true. Nevertheless this is rare for a scandal in Toronto politics to have all of Canada watching.

UPDATE: The last 48 hours have consisted of even juicier news on this. The man who reportedly showed Gawker the alleged video was recently murdered. Many councilors have since resigned over the controversy yesterday in which Ford called: ‘business as usual.’ This could lead to a bigger scandal than one thinks and could lead to Ford’s resignation in the future.

What will happen to Rob Ford after this incident and the aftermath remains unclear. He is still mayor of Toronto and shows no signs of resigning. The video is still unseen and still continues to make news. More news is expected to continue to unravel over the next days or weeks.

However the next election could tell the results. Ford might even resign before the election. I’m sure with Toronto having 2 1/2 years of experience with him, many thousands have already made up their minds should ford run for re-election. Also this incident shouldn’t really matter for all of Canada but it does show we can have some crazy politicians of our own.

WORK CITED:

WIKIPEDIA:Rob Ford. Wikipedia.com. 2013. Wikimedia Foundation Inc.  <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Ford>

J. Crew In The Middle Of ‘Toenailgate’

Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment
This picture in a J. Crew e-flyer is the subject of major discussion this week.

Ever notice how in the news there’s always a story that comes from nowhere and is not worth paying any mind, until some loudmouth makes a hullabaloo about it? It’s funny that while Japan is recovering from a tsunami, earthquake and nuclear meltdown, and Libya is fighting a war to depose a dictator, there’s a minor story that makes a lot of loud news. It happened this week when the picture on the right that was featured in an e-catalog from J.Crew got on a conservative pundit’s nerves to the point he spoke out about it. And it has since drawn a lot of reactions since Tuesday.

It all started when J.Crew sent out its e-catalog to subscribers on Tuesday April 5th. For those unfamiliar, J. Crew is a clothing store known for its colorful preppy looking clothes. Its most famous customer is First Lady Michelle Obama. Included is a Saturday With Jenna column written by J. Crew president and creative director Jenna Lyons. On that column’s front page that weekend was that picture of her having fun with her 5 year-old son Beckett. Why should that cause controversy? Because the fun she had with Beckett was painting his toenails with pink nail polish. She even included in the Quality Time caption: “Lucky for me, I ended up with a boy whose favorite color is pink. Toenail painting is way more fun in neon.”

Some of the J. Crew customers who received that ad would look at it as something funny and some might raise their eyebrows over it. It was able to stay away from being a complete controversy, until Tuesday April 12th. That’s when FOX News Psychologist Dr. Keith Ablow made these comments:

 Yeah, well, it may be fun and games now, Jenna, but at least put some money aside for psychotherapy for the kid—and maybe a little for others who’ll be affected by your “innocent” pleasure.

This is a dramatic example of the way that our culture is being encouraged to abandon all trappings of gender identity—homogenizing males and females when the outcome of such “psychological sterilization” is not known.

Dr. Ablow further goes on to talk about the benefits and goods of gender distinctions and continues:

Jenna Lyons and J. Crew seem to know exactly what they’re up to. That’s why the photograph of Jenna’s son so prominently displays his hot pink, neon toe nails. These folks are hostile to the gender distinctions that actually are part of the magnificent synergy that creates and sustains the human race. They respect their own creative notions a whole lot more than any creative Force in the universe.

Dr. Ablow wasn’t the only right wing pundit speaking their mind on this. Four days earlier, Erin M. Brown, writer for the Culture and Media Institute website, wrote an article on the ad which she declared ‘blatant propaganda celebrating transgendered children’. She then went on to say: “Not only is Beckett likely to change his favorite color as early as tomorrow, Jenna’s indulgence (or encouragement) could make life hard for the boy in the future. J.CREW, known for its tasteful and modest clothing, apparently does not mind exploiting Beckett behind the façade of liberal, transgendered identity politics.”

Since the ad controversy, there have been a lot of responses. Numerous news stories in websites, newspapers and television have featured the heated issue. All three major networks have done discussions about this. They’ve interviewed parents on the street: some were freaked out while some liked it. Psychiatrists interviewed have said it’s normal for children to play cross-dressing games. Some news stories showed celebrity parents including Gwen Stefani with pictures of their own boys wearing nail polish.  Alyona Minkovski from RT Network responded: “Look people. Mom’s actually spending time with her child having fun, which is a lot more than what I can say about a lot of parents out there who tend to neglect their children. And if painting your child’s toenails is a way for a child and parent to connect, then have at it.” Jon Stewart even talked about it on his Daily Show, declaring the fiasco ‘Toemageddon 2011’ and commenting: “You make it sound like it’s a story about incest or cannabalism…You’re all aware that nail polish comes off, right? You’re all acting like this lady gave her son an ‘I Love Cock’ tattoo.” For the record, J. Crew have not responded because they ‘don’t want to add fuel to a non-issue.’

Even amongst the internet, there have been responses. Youtubers have also spoken their mind with one man even paining his fingernails pink. On the opposite side, there’s been at least one video in support of the complaining pundits, from the channel Final Justice Movement. Bloggers have posted their opinions. Message boards have also been loaded with comments both for the ad ‘what century is this?’ and against this ‘This is disgusting!’ Change.org started a petition thanking J.Crew ‘for the heartwarming ad’ and received 7500 signatures. The 10 year-old son of a writer for Wired magazine painted his fingernails green in response. There’s even a Pink Piggies page on Facebook where the page honors ‘people of all gender identities.’

One thing I like to say is that it’s another example of how people like to raise a big fiasco of just about anything. I’ve seen it from both the left and right side of people raising a big fuss over something simple. It seems like the thing nowadays to be offended about anything. Years ago, people were declaring The Passion Of The Christ to be anti-Semitic when it’s the story of Christ’s crucifixion that has been played out many times in the past including on film. Recently after the movie Mars Needs Moms was released, a gay Youtube personality posted on his Twitter page that it’s very offensive to non-traditional families. And now we have right-wing pundits taking a crack at this ad. Do people enjoy getting offended?

Yes, it’s a different parent-child bonding scenario but it’s not worth declaring ‘propaganda’ to turn into an issue for headlines’ sake. I also agree with Alyona: in case you didn’t notice, there’s a load of joy between Jenna and Beckett in that picture. It’s very common for parents to neglect their children in their busy lives so a moment like that should be considered fun.Secondly I don’t think paining a son’s toenails pink makes him gay. His orientation has already formed itself even before he was born. In addition when I brought this story up at work, one of my co-workers mentioned that she painted her nephew’s fingernails and they had a fun time together. Weeks later when she brought up ‘nail polish’, he said “That’s girls stuff.” So what does that tell you? Also I admire J. Crew for not responding to this and dismissing it for the ‘non-issue’ that it is.