Youtube Bends Over Backwards for Kate Upton “Cat Daddy” Video!

Jamie Reidy rejoices that Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue cover girl Kate Upton’s hot dance video is no longer banned on Youtube.

Kate Upton fought The Man. And The Man groveled before her, like most mortal men will do.

The Daily Beast’s Lizzie Crocker reports that the internet giant realized it made a mistake:

“With the massive volume of videos on our site, sometimes we make the wrong call,” the spokesperson said in an email. “When it’s brought to our attention that a video has been removed mistakenly, we act quickly to reinstate it.”

Yea for Youtube!  And Kudos to Kate for being so understanding:

A spokesman for Upton said, “The video is just Kate being Kate. YouTube is a great company and we respect whatever their decision is on this.”

Now, for those who wanna see what all the fuss was about, here’s the infamous video:

 

Anybody know Terry Richardson?  I’d like to buy that man a beer!

Premium Membership, The Good Men Project

About Jamie Reidy

Jamie Reidy is a former U.S. Army officer turned little blue pill pusher turned author. His first book "Hard Sell: The Evolution of A Viagra Salesman"
served as the basis for the movie "Love and Other Drugs" starring Jake Gyllenhaal. Jamie is currently writing his new book, "Game On: One Fanatic's Fantastic, Foolish and Futile Attempt to Attend 365 Sporting Events in 365 Days." He discovered his latest story featured on Good Men Project - "Hope Shoots and Scores" - on Day 39 of his crazy journey.

Comments

  1. She may be the cutest living human being, but I have to admit being concerned for her future.

    And isn’t that the “swimsuit” you were horrified by?!

    • Valter Viglietti says:

      If you mean “concerned for her future as a dancer”, I could agree. She’s a lousy dancer. ;)

      Aside from that, I can’t understand what the fuss was about. :?

  2. The banning of this video was probably either a publicity stunt (think about all those “too hot for tv GoDaddy” ads) or someone taking copyright/trademark way too far (again).

    But Joanna why are you concerned for her future?

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      Okay imagine this:

      You’re wearing a bikini that basically doesn’t fit. A guy comes up to you and asks you to dance. So you do!

      I’m just saying… Sorta suggestible.

      But I shouldn’t be mean and assume anything. I think she’s GORGEOUS by the way and I think she was really funny in the Skullcandy video – even though I disagreed with the entire execution of the vid.

  3. Well, I take back anything I thought or said about Photoshop when the SI cover came out.

  4. Natalie says:

    Hmmmmm. I first “liked” this webiste because I understood it’s goal was to debunk the banal and predictible portrayal of men as mindless. My 30 year-old co-worker watched this all day yesterday. I only now just watched it assuming there was some point (other than the obvious..yeah, I get it…it moved, even for me) given it was on this website. Posting this just for the sake of it makes you no better than a guy who calls every woman a “slut” or “whore” (What’s that’s slut’s story?, etc.). Attracting viewers to your website can be a slippery-slope. In this case, you definitely slipped. I’m debating whether or not you deserve a second chance before I “dislike” you on FB.

    Danny, I’m assuming Joanna is concerned for her because the part most guys probably aren’t seeing is her awkwardly covering her boobs at the end and shyly saying “that’s all you get”. Here’s a woman who appears to be a rising star (though I really have no idea as, like my co-worker, I had no idea who she was before this), which might make one assume is in control of her career. Here she is unabashedly a pawn for some dweeby man’s (and whoever was behind the camera) scheme.

    • Natalie,

      It’s difficult to see where you are coming from. You likely don’t know Ms. Upton personally, and yet you assume that she is not “in control of her career.” For all you know, this entire stunt was orchestrated by her. The post certainly suggests that Ms. Upton herself was involved if trying to get YouTube to reconsider their decisions, which would indicate a more active role than “pawn.” Your assumptions lead you to jump to a conclusion you may want to be true, but isn’t necessarily.

      Furthermore, whenever we are faced with the potential for censorship, isn’t that worth having a discussion about? This post was about how YouTube refused to let a video stand, and then later brought it back. What was in the video is key to understanding these underlying decisions. We need to know why people felt it necessary to censor in the first place; and we may need to have a conversation (especially in light of the recent twitter incident with Dana Loesch) about the ability of angry mobs to enact censorship online through false reports of “spam” or “obscenity.”

    • Natalie, Thank you for saying EXACTLY what I was thinking. I, too, came to this site on the same thoughts. Clearly, I was mistaken. A Shame.

      • Joanna Schroeder says:

        Ladies, I am the one who was concerned for her future and I’m a Senior Editor of this site.

        Here’s the thing… We all objectify. But we do it based on different things (as generalizations based upon sex and as individuals). While the “visual” is generally less important to women, there are men we sexually obsess on. McDreamy and McSteamy come to mind (gag on the names).

        I don’t think it’s bad that “guys being guys” like to watch videos of Kate Upton dancing. She looks fucking… I don’t know… crazy hot!! I’m generally more into dudes, but this woman’s body is ca-ray-zee.

        I don’t condemn the guys for liking to watch this. But I do think it’s okay for us women to say, “I hope she has other things to do to build a future upon.”

        There are women who were SI Swimsuit Covers who’ve made great lives for themselves after their 15 minutes were up – Kathy Ireland is a perfect example – she has a whole crazy empire and is richer from that than from modeling.

        We don’t have to ask the same things about McDreamy, we know he’s going to have a career being hot for a long time, because of the way Hollywood values leading men and their sex appeal for significantly longer than leading women.

        Again, I will repeat, there is nothing wrong with enjoying the site of Kate Upton dancing. NOTHING. And I don’t want any of the guys to think I’m saying there is.

        But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t merit a little contextualizing.

        And THAT is why you should stick around The Good Men Project – The contextualizing!!

        • Joanna, you’re very right, context is king. In that vein, I’d just like to add a few comments about this video.

          First of all, for those who were introduced to Ms. Upton through this video, get to know her. She’s been a rising star in the modeling world, catching her biggest break when she was featured on the 2012 SI cover this year. Besides her charm and smile, she’s been known almost her whole career for her fairly mobile chest. In fact, far before the “Cat Daddy” video went viral, Ms. Upton had inspired many, more explicit videos detailing the movement of her torso (I won’t post links, do your own research if your like) resulting in a decent and growing fanbase. In interviews she openly acknowledges this part of her modeling appeal, even admitting that even she “didn’t realize they were that bouncy.”

          I’d also like to address the Cat Daddy. This song swept the nation (or at least a subsection of it) thanks to the Bay-born Rej3ctz. (try to listen to this song on speaker/headphones with bass, the beat doesn’t really make sense otherwise). Building off the success of other Bay area hits like New Boyz You’re A Jerk, the Cat Daddy followed in the footsteps of it’s predecessors by incorporating a signature dance (actually, a variation on a Cali Swag District cut, The Dougie) with forgettable lyrics (“Man I go to work, true winner/Jeans skinny, like Squidward”, really??) and an infectious beat. Interestingly, Ms. Upton has a video of herself teaching us how to dougie, too! Note that the music videos accompanying these songs are essentially montages of people performing small snippets of the dance. While these songs by no means define our generation, as a fellow 1992 baby I can attest that these songs are common party bangers, and the dances known and beloved – or, well, enjoyed – by many.

          The viral nature of these songs brings me to my point. All three artists I mentioned above became famous by making breakout viral hit singles. Like Ms. Upton, New Boyz, Cali Swag District, and the Rej3ctz had other, less successful songs/videos which garnered them some attention. Then they made one which took off and catapulted them to fame. Ms. Upton is riding the same train. The difference is, instead of making music for a living, she’s trying to be sexy for a living. Therefore, she makes videos of herself being sexy, hoping one will go viral and help push her career to the next level. Playing off the pop culture she’s immersed in, she films herself Cat Daddying and put it on youtube just like thousands of other people have already done. The difference: she’s hot.

          I guess what I’m saying is I can’t fault her tactics. If you are young, talented, and want to take your fame into your own hands, this video is the kind of product you need make. Media moments like these are the currency with which my generation buys fame. I totally agree with Erin (below) that our societies growing addiction to sensationalist media hurts us, and probably the people who participate too! I hate it! It sucks! But in the current environment, views = fame.

          That’s my 2 cents.

        • Natalie says:

          Joanna, considering your stated fear of what guys might to think of you for making a comment about this “article” makes me fear for YOUR career. As a “senior editor of this site”, surely, you have bigger balls than that. You, after all, are the first one to make a vague dig about Kate’s career without elaboration until you felt the need to defend yourself. Then we got paragraphs. All of what you posted would have been helpful from the get-go, but, more importantly, as an editor, it would have been better for you to ask the author to “contextualize” this Youtube scandal (ohhhhhhh, don’t you love how I’m elevating this to scandal already?!). Using it without context is gratuitous. The author included the video for a reason – sticky factor (both for page hits and Kleenex boxes glued to walls purposes). The “context” he includes is of the quality of a Facebook entry: “the man groveled before her, like most mortal men will do”, “And kudos for Kate for being so understanding”, “Anybody know Terry Richardson? I’d like to buy that man a beer!” I just about quoted the ENTIRE “article”. For those who got in my grill over the “pawn” comment, the CONTEXT the author of this article overlaid onto it by saying he would buy him a beer (and what is this, a DGU – Dweeby Guys United – meeting?…excuse me, Sir, for judging based on looks, but…you started it) SUGGESTS that Terry Richardson is responsible for bringing the video to life. Soooooooo, not only is the piece this website chose to post re: the event capitalizing on the “fish in a barrel” factor of a jubbly wubblies in motion but GOES FURTHER by hailing Mr. Richardson as some kind of hero. So take this input from a non-consumer of popular culture. I came to YOUR website to understand what happened after hearing my co-worker go nuts over it the previous day. I didn’t know Kate Upton or her apparent history of posting bikini, dance videos. I didn’t know Terry Richardson. I didn’t know what happened on Youtube. I came away none the wiser, miserable that I know who any of these people are, and thoroughly disappointed that the one hopeful website I had found for guidance on how to raise my son is falling short of its lofty (yeah, lofty, because it’s HARD to not cater to base needs) goal. Before anyone attacks this comment, please refrain from emotional outbursts. Ask yourself, based on the editorial commentary of this “article”, what is it’s purpose? Then watch the video again and have at it any way you chose to celebrate its existence.

          • Copyleft says:

            It depends on what sort of guidance you want and how you want your son to be.

            If you want to raise him to be sexless and androgynous and apologetic for his weiner, for example, there are any number of radical-feminist sites that would gladly offer you advice on how to destroy his male identity. If you want “how to raise my son to be a feminist” advice–again, there are sites for that.

            This isn’t one of them. This is where men talk about masculiniity and the male experience, for the benefit of men. Fathers, sons, brothers, husbands, etc. The discussions here acknowledge and argue about where men screw up, but we also applaud the good things about men–and sexuality is (and always will be) one of them.

  5. wellokaythen says:

    If one goal of art is to produce a strong reaction in the observer, then this is, by definition, great art….
    : – )

  6. Dancing is a feminist action.

  7. Natalie says:

    Mike, as I said before I didn’t even know who she was, so you are correct in assuming I don’t know her. So the media stunt worked. Now I do. I am only suggesting this (meaning this particular film) was not her idea because of what she says and does at the end. Reading up on it more I see it explained as a flim “hosted and shot” by Terry Richardson (dweeby guy?). So that’s my two cents on that topic.

    Re: censorship, having been a huge consumer of porn in my day, this being shot in what appears to be a home with one hot chick and multiiple men in the background gives it a home-made porn feel. Youtube has gotten into many a pickle over stuff like that (as well as private content of public figures), so I don’t AT ALL consider this censorship as opposed to cover your arse until you’ve made all the appropriate checks. Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd, again. It sounds like one big media stunt so who knows who flagged it to begin with. The content certainly is not threatening or unusual in the current climate of these United States.

    Lastly, on the comments about this website’s use of the clip. It would have been nice to explore it from the perspective of what this site purports to be. This is not a freedom of speech website. Anyone can (and has) posted this video. These guys claim to have a loftier goal: “a cerebral, new media alternative” to glossy men’s magazines. In fact, The Good Men Project is not so much a magazine as a social movement. We are fostering a national discussion centered around modern manhood and the question, “What does it mean to be a good man”? I didn’t make them do that. They chose it. So live up to it.

    • Copyleft says:

      We ARE living up to it, Natalie. One of the aspects of being a good man is that women don’t get to define what that means. Men do.

      • assman says:

        “One of the aspects of being a good man is that women don’t get to define what that means. Men do.”

        Anybody can define anything they want. There is no definition police. If women want to define what they think a good men is than they will. The definition of good men is open ended.

        • Exactly, and not one man can create a singular definition of what it means to be a good man for all men. Individuals will define for themselves what it means to be a good anything, and you have no right to say otherwise.

  8. wellokaythen says:

    Okay, I’ll engage in a tired gender cliche that probably sounds sexist:

    Thank God I don’t have a daughter. If my daughter did this my head would explode. I would feel like a total failure as a parent.

    And no, buying me a house with her supermodel wealth would not make up for it. Maybe a little, but not totally…..

    • matera says:

      It probably best that you don’t have a daughter. Why on earth would you have such a dramatic reaction to your hypothetical daughter being goofy in a G-rated video?

      • wellokaythen says:

        I see your point, that if I have a problem with my daughter doing something like this then maybe it’s my own internal stuff that I need to deal with and the problem isn’t what she’s doing. I admit this could be more about my own sex issues than hers.

        But, come on, I wouldn’t characterize her dance here as “goofy,” exactly. I doubt you would see such jiggling and hip motion in a G-rated movie. (If so, then I’ve been going to the wrong damn movies.) I don’t think she was (acting) embarrassed at the end of the video for being “goofy,” exactly. If she did the Hokey Pokey or the Funky Chicken or even the Cabbage Patch, I might call that goofy. This I would call titillating.

        (To be fair, anything that she did while wearing that bikini would not get a G rating. Her fencing with a sword or reciting the Gettysburg Address in that outfit would probably count as gratuitous to a lot of people.)

    • (R)Evoluzione says:

      Well, I’m going to engage in some tired gender stereotypes too:

      Nomnomnom! MMmmmm-Mmmmm! Yum.

    • I agree wholeheartedly, man. If my daughter did this, I too, would go berserk. Heck, when I was in college, my sister – who happens to be older – knew that it was best for us not to cross paths while we were out on the town. She was a good girl, however, I know how us guys are and what we think about. As such, I never wanted to be around if she was partying.

      As for Upton: she is beautiful. She is also extraordinarily sexy and somewhat mature beyond her years (appearance, sexuality) to an extent AT NINETEEN. That is the first thing that I think of…19?!? And, of course, the media is throwing more gasoline of the flame that she is. Crazy.

      If she is this much of a bombshell at 19, where and what will she be doing 5 years from now?

  9. Gosh! What to say about this. I get the impression that when we seen yet another sensationalistic viral video, we are selling our souls a piece at a time for it.

    She’s a beautiful young woman. Although I personally think 19 year olds still have a lot of growing up to do emotionally. And I’m sceeved out that there will probably be 12 year old boys to their 40+ year old fathers all rushing to youtube to take part of the titilation. I wonder if she’s been the topic of conversation after Dad passed the peas to son while Mom and Sis sit nearby.I also wonder how many Mom’s and sisters will rush to youtube to post their own “cat daddy” videos of them shaking their bodies to show how sexy they are too. Which makes me realize how important the information we pay attention is, in relation to what kids pick up is important to adults.

    I’m completely turned off by this video that celebrates a pretty stereotypical message found often in media: Pervy old guy (T.Richards) in on, and exploiting the body of, young teenage girl-woman (Upton) for “TerryTV”. Terry reminds me of the son of a wealthy man that rides on Daddy’s coat tails tapping his fingers together with evil laughter to follow. He looks like the kind of guy that would be found in a trench coat flashing strangers. Kate, while very beautiful (no doubt), seems to be selling more then just her body for some fame and fortune. Is this what it takes to be famous today? To be revelant? Whlie I’m sure models like Cindy Crawford had their salcious moments, something about this just seems different and off. And the rest of us? The commoners with our eyes peeled wide paying too much attention to stuff that is really pointless.

    I wasn’t going to comment on this at first for that reason, Not wanting to give more attention to things that are rather pointless and where I see too many people paying attention to it as it is. But I was compelled by a lot of the negative messages i think are in such a seemingly small and what some might say is harmless, video. I think it’s the smalle and seemingly small things that are slowly changing and shifting our society.

    • Perfectly stated.

    • matera says:

      You’re having the most bizarre reaction to uncharacteristically tame and harmless video.

      “And I’m sceeved out that there will probably be 12 year old boys to their 40+ year old fathers all rushing to youtube to take part of the titillation.”

      So what if they are? Anyway, this video is hardly titillating considering that thousands of your average 19 year old boys/girls next door are making explicit homemade porn for non-profit consumption. This video almost harkens back to a more innocent, pre-internet era where a swimsuit was something to gawk at.

      “He looks like the kind of guy that would be found in a trench coat flashing strangers.”

      What an utterly misandrist comment. A man looks a certain way and you feel entitled to label him a sexual predator? Do you realize how heinous that is?

      • Natalie says:

        Ha! Wait a second. You are berating someone for judging someone based on looks?! Comical. I guess the Secret Society of Dweeby Guys Dreaming of Rubbing up Against the Pretties (I just renamed DGU) has pretty thin skin.

        • Hmm, so I guess a black man who gets miffed because someone assumes he’s a rapist simply because he’s black also has a thin skin according to you as profiling people as criminals based on innocuous visual characteristics is just dandy in your book it seems.

          • Natalie says:

            As a Caramel Machiatto woman whose mother got profiled both coming and going on our last flight together, I think it’s fair to say you don’t own racial profiling. It’s a sad state under which we have found ourselves as Americans, but it has nothing to do with this story. It is a comment about judging a person who has CHOSEN to put himself out into the world in a scenario that most likely wouldn’t be how one would chose to be remembered on a tombstone (though I could be wrong). Judging ain’t never pretty, but he’s getting it as a result of an act not simply because he looks a certain way. It’s the combo that’s damning.

            • matera says:

              He’s done nothing in this video to justify assuming that he’s a sexual predator and anyone who does so is engaging in the same kind of unwarranted profiling your mother experienced.

              You already said you didn’t know who he was, so you have no grounds to judge him. This video is completely harmless and not even sexual.

              Where’s all that hard data needed to support opinions you claimed was important to you?

      • Amanda W. says:

        Read up on this Terry guy. He is a creep, regardless of his looks.

        I do have to admit that I thought she looked uncomfortable before the dance and after, especially when she kept check to make sure her top was still in place.

    • Copyleft says:

      “I also wonder how many Mom’s and sisters will rush to youtube to post their own “cat daddy” videos of them shaking their bodies to show how sexy they are too. Which makes me realize how important the information we pay attention is, in relation to what kids pick up is important to adults.”

      Or, perhaps what we’re seeing is a tiny shift toward acknowledgment that being sexy actually IS important… indeed, very important. To everyone.

      We’ve had a few depressing decades of attempted denial of this, but I for one am glad to see signs that the flood waters are receding.

    • wellokaythen says:

      “Pervy old guy (T.Richards) in on, and exploiting the body of, young teenage girl-woman (Upton) for “TerryTV”.”

      What I hear you saying is that if Mr. Richards was a little younger and better looking that his participation would have been more acceptable to you? Or, more specifically, if his haircut, facial hair and glasses were more flattering and didn’t make him look so old. He is probably much younger than he looks on the video. As for his being “pervy,” I would need a clearer definition before agreeing or disagreeing on that. (To be honest, I don’t think being a “perv” is necessarily a bad thing, though of course the term is usually used pejoratively.) I’m guessing that Mr. Richards finds her sexy and feels lust towards her (though I can’t assume for sure), and if that means he’s pervy, then he’s pervy.

      (Maybe I’m just being defensive. Terry Richards looks to be younger than I am, so if he’s a pervy old guy, and being a pervy old guy is bad, then….)

      As for her being exploited for her body, that’s a fair question. Not getting paid for this is certainly labor exploitation. If it’s a question of her age, then at what age is dancing salaciously for a camera not exploitation but a free choice?

    • “And I’m sceeved out that there will probably be 12 year old boys to their 40+ year old fathers all rushing to youtube to take part of the titilation.”

      I am skeeved out by you being skeeved out by things that complete strangers with no connection to you are doing.

      “Not getting paid for this is certainly labor exploitation.”

      Uh.. no. It’s called volunteering. When I help an old lady with her groceries or work at the soup kitchen, that’s not “certainly labor exploitation”

      • “I am skeeved out by you being skeeved out by things that complete strangers with no connection to you are doing.”

        I’m so confused. You are “skeeved out” by the opinion expressed by (I assume) a “complete stranger…with no connection to you” who is “skeeved out” by “complete strangers with no connection” to her. Is that correct?

  10. Agemaki says:

    Her top doesn’t seem supportive enough…I would think all that jiggling would be uncomfortable. :/

  11. matera says:

    How can this be controversial when millions of aging mothers were drooling over an underaged and topless Taylor Lautner flaunting his body in the Twilight films? That was a more genuine instance of Hollywood exploitation and middle-aged perversion and no one made a peep about it.

    I wonder why.

    • Natalie says:

      Eh, because it didn’t exist? You might want to check your sources.

      • Holy hell Taylor Lautner and Robert Pattenson don’t exist?

        Chances are you may be trying to say that there weren’t any middle aged women going gaga over those two. I have to say matera is right on that one because it did happen.

        (Sure you can say that Pattenson was a few centuries old but he was still written out to be a high school age kid.)

        I’ve noticed something. Men go gaga over a girl that’s under aged and it’s perversion. Women go gaga over a boy that’s under aged and it’s not a blip on the radar. (Sounds a lot like the way teacher/student statutory rape is portrayed in the States. Male teacher/female student is called rape, female teacher/male student is called “sexual relationship”, “affair”, “fling”, “relations”, pretty much everything but rape. And that doesn’t even get into how when it’s male teacher/female student people go right to how he must have manipulated her or brainwashed her or say that she really couldn’t consent but in female teacher/male student you’re lucky if people don’t try to say that he manipulated/brainwashed her, or even say that he raped her.)

        • Natalie says:

          Danny, what I am saying is, upon doing a prelim google search for older women loving Taylor (because I look for hard data when I don’t have anything more than an opinion or a analogy or two) I didn’t find any trend supporting the matera claim. Can you? Opinions can keep this chain going on forever. What ever happened to critical thinking in debate?

          Re: statutory rape, rape is rape. Hence the women who have been caught for partaking in the flesh of boys have been tried, convicted and serve time. It’s true that cases often go unreported, but speaking from personal experience the opposite (male teachers) also go unreported. It’s all a crying shame.

          On both counts, I think it’s naive for any man to complain about either of these issues in relation to men vs. women. It doesn’t at all make me happy to “one-up” you guys on these statements, but the numbers on violence/degradation of women vs. men in this culture are stacked against you. Here’s a start: http://www.endvawnow.org/en/articles/299-fast-facts-statistics-on-violence-against-women-and-girls-.html

          • Hence the women who have been caught for partaking in the flesh of boys have been tried, convicted and serve time.
            For less time and with less stigma. Yes there is a stigma with girl victims of male teachers but when it boy victims of female teachers (or with any female rapist/male victim scenario) the stigma is “because you are male you can’t be the victim of a female rapist”.

            I agree its all a crying shame but if rape is rape then why do people have to run a gender check on the accuser and accused before deciding how serious to take it?

            On both counts, I think it’s naive for any man to complain about either of these issues in relation to men vs. women. It doesn’t at all make me happy to “one-up” you guys on these statements, but the numbers on violence/degradation of women vs. men in this culture are stacked against you.
            I’ll check that when I get home tonight but I’m willing to bet that there is nothing in that link that justifies the idea that female against male violence should be taken less seriously than male against female violence (because if it did I bet you wouldn’t be sharing it). Nothing that says male victims of female violence should not get help. Nothing that says female violence isn’t that big of a deal. Yes there are men out there that try to get into arguments over the numbers but in my case its not the numbers, its the conclusions that peope are drawing from the numbers.

            I think it’s naive for any man to complain about either of these issues in relation to men vs. women.
            When the men vs women relation is a matter of something being treated differenty solely because its a man or woman I don’t think there is anything naive about it. Unless you think its naive to get rid of gender based stigma?

          • assman says:

            We have a beautiful, happy women dancing and you guys are arguing about violence, rape and degradation. That isn’t what I see in the video.

          • Danny, what I am saying is, upon doing a prelim google search for older women loving Taylor (because I look for hard data when I don’t have anything more than an opinion or a analogy or two) I didn’t find any trend supporting the matera claim. Can you? Opinions can keep this chain going on forever. What ever happened to critical thinking in debate?

            http://www.examiner.com/article/older-ladies-love-robert-pattinson-and-taylor-lautner
            Older women stealing cardboard cutouts of Lautner and Pattenson

            http://www.showbizspy.com/article/208593/taylor-lautner-given-old-lady-knickers.html
            Older woman asking Lautner to sign her knickers

            http://screencrave.com/2010-02-11/taylor-lautner-is-18-creepy-fans-rejoice/
            Older women being among those rejoicing when Lautner finally turned 18. I specifically recall people saying it was creepy when men were doing the same when the Olsen twins turned 18 a few years before.

            http://articles.cnn.com/2009-11-16/entertainment/older.twilight.fans_1_twilight-fan-robert-pattinson-vampire?_s=PM:SHOWBIZ

            Got those from searching “older women love Taylor lautner”.

          • Here’s a start: http://www.endvawnow.org/en/articles/299-fast-facts-statistics-on-violence-against-women-and-girls-.html

            Ah just as I figured. That start only states the numbers on violence against women and girls. Not a thing about how male victims of female violence don’t deserve help and justice, how violent females shouldn’t be taken seriously, or that its okay to ignore female against male for the sake of dealing with male against female violence.

            Yet those attitudes persist. Looks like they don’t come from the stats themselves but from the people that choose to use the stats that way. That’s what needs to be confronted.

          • matera says:

            So Danny has provided many links that show that plenty of older, creepy moms are rubbing their dripping ladybits over a child, while you have no evidence that people are overly perving over this video featuring an adult woman.

            Where’s your retraction?

        • “Male teacher/female student is called rape, female teacher/male student is called “sexual relationship”, “affair”, “fling”, “relations”, pretty much everything but rape.”

          Danny, in articles I have read regarding a female teacher having sex with a male teenager, the majority of the comments left by men have been along the lines of, “Why didn’t I have a teacher like that?” and “Lucky kid”. The majority of the comments left by women express the desire for legal prosecution of the teacher. I’m a woman, and I use the word rape to describe an adult having sex with a minor, regardless of gender. I don’t understand why for quite a number of men, that word does not seem to be in their vocabulary when the victim is male.

          • Peter Houlihan says:

            Possibly because men, more than women, are encouraged to view any heterosexual sex as a positive thing and not wanting to have sex as not becoming of a man.

            Coversely women seem to be more encouraged to say no, and might be more able to understand a situation where someone doesn’t want to have sex.

          • Oh I’ve seen what you speak of and I chalk it up to the same reason I’ve seen women commenting on a woman that was raped asking, “Well what did she think was going to happen after acting like that all night?”, “If she wasn’t dressed like that…”, “Look at the way she was all over that guy….”. When you’re raised to believe stuff like that its no wonder that you still spew even into your adult years.

            I’ll say that even I had that attitude you describe in your comment for a while until I stopped and thought about it. And I recognized that I was led to believe that because I’m a guy I simply could not be raped by a woman because as a guy I’m supposed to be up for sex with women no matter what right?

            That’s also he same mentality that leaves women not understanding how a woman can rape a man. And I mean that literally, I have actually had to explain to a few women before how a woman can rape a man.

            1. They didn’t understand that an erection does not automatically equal consent (even it been long said that a woman “getting wet” when raped doesn’t equal consent). Anyone with a penis knows that erections can develop on an involuntarily.

            2. They didn’t understand how a woman could over power a man. Even if you don’t count the number of women who would be able to over power a man there is still a matter of physical overpower not being the only way to rape someone. Is it really that hard to consider that women can use drugs, alcohol, coercion, blackmail…

          • “I don’t understand why for quite a number of men, that word does not seem to be in their vocabulary when the victim is male.”

            Because statutory rape is not rape. Its consensual sex in many cases. If I were a 14 year old boy and I had one of those teachers I would be quite happy about it. I don’t see it as rape. I think it should be fully legal and we should have an age of consent of 14.

          • This is the pervasive idea that men should always want sex… which is wrong. Its the same cause for the cases in the news where women attack men for withholding or not wanting to have sex.

  12. Alright, so I watched this video a few times…mostly just to figure out what I actually thought of it. I mean, yes, it’s hot. It’s a hot woman in a bikini dancing. All her wobbly bits are sufficiently wobbly that watching her bump and grind is titillating. But, was it objectifying?

    Well, in general I find the whole modelling industry objectifying. The whole point is that these people aren’t actually people…they’re bodies to highlight a piece of clothing…or to highlight one of their better physical attributes. For all that Tyra Banks has tried to give models identity and personhood of their own in the public consciousness, it hasn’t really taken hold much. It’s inherent in the occupation; it’s about physical bodies and so modelling is objectifying.

    That being said, it’s what Upton (and other models) signed on for. They weren’t duped into it; they didn’t think they were signing on for charity work only to find themselves thrust into the modelling industry against their will. They either made an informed decision, or made a rash one (which is equally their responsibility for not fully recognizing the nature of the business they entered).

    Now all of that being said, it’s the end of the video that makes me a bit worried. The beginning and the bit where she’s dancing, she seems like someone who’s totally in control of her own actions. She knows what she’s doing. That end though…embarrassingly covering herself with her arms and saying ‘that’s all you get.’ That just seems like someone who suddenly realized she wasn’t quite comfortable with what she was doing. It brings up worries that maybe she thinks that all of her worth is in her appearance, and in being sexy.

    Or maybe that ending was done of purpose. Her image isn’t exactly that of a rocket scientist…the bimbo, ‘I’m not fully in control’ aspect to the end might have just been part of the whole thing. The problem is that all we have is the video to go on, so we don’t really know what she was thinking at the end bit.

    • Natalie says:

      Heather, read this article. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/24/coco-rocha-elle-brasil-may-2012_n_1450101.html It was enlightening to me when I came across it. Coco Rocha has a strict no nudity policy. She can because she’s a successful supermodel. However, even she doesn’t have control over the ultimate image from any shoot. It’ll be interesting to see how it evolves. I would be careful about suggesting that “models” are all cut of the same cloth. Like any sub-group of humankind, diversity abounds. Today, Vogue announced it will no longer use models that are “too skinny”. I have no idea how they’ll determine that threshold, but it’s also a sign that the wind is shifting.

  13. wellokaythen says:

    Something’s bugging me, and I’ve watched the video over and over in an attempt to figure it out. It looks like she has an appendectomy scar but it’s on the wrong side and somewhat towards the hip. Maybe the image has been reversed? I’ll need to watch a few more times to get to the bottom of this.

    Last two comments from me:
    1. She can’t quite be a totally sexy woman to me until I see what her back or the back of her neck looks like. Her front is not definitive to me.

    2. It’s funny at the end how she gets all modest and embarrassed and covers her breasts. A little late for that, my dear.

    • “2. It’s funny at the end how she gets all modest and embarrassed and covers her breasts. A little late for that, my dear.”

      And this is what I mean, did she do that on purpose in order to illicit this sort of response? Or was that genuine embarrassment? Because if it was genuine, then it’s certainly not funny.

      • I dont know if this is a real trend or not but whenever i see a woman do something that isn’t serious, but does it confidently and well, the end is usually followed by a laugh/giggle/bashful smile as if to knock the edge off the amazement of everybody picking their jaws up off the ground.

        • It wasn’t the giggle itself, so much as the covering up and the “that’s all you get” comment that worried me.

          As for women giggling/laughing after doing something well…well I know why I do that. It’s a pre-emptive way to negate any negative criticism. So that when someone says “wow you did that badly” you can say “oh I wasn’t serious,” and the proof is in the laughter at the end. £10 says that Kate knows she’s not the best dancer in the world, but also knows that she’s hot. So she laughs at the end so that when the inevitable “she can’t dance” comments come flying, she can say – oh that wasn’t me really dancing. I was ‘joke’ dancing.

    • Copyleft says:

      First time I’ve ever seen a back-of-the-neck fetishist.

      Whatever puts the crisp in your cucumber!

  14. gotthatpma says:

    Do a Google search for “Terry Richardson” or take a look at his Wikipedia article. Whatever you think about the video, dude’s probably not someone you’d want your daughter to hang out with.

    • Amanda W. says:

      Agreed. Before I saw he was somehow involved in this, I thought “oh just another supermodel doing what they do – be sexy” but after, wow. My gut churned… that guy is definitely a creep.

  15. assman says:

    I love the video. It made me happy to watch it. She is like sunshine. The only thing video that made me this happy was Die Antwoord.

  16. GreenHer0 says:

    The only thing I saw at the end of the video is the same thing I’ve seen more than a hundred girls do after doing any kind of extensive movement. Checking to see if her tops still in place and covering up just to make sure they’re not slipping out. Maybe her top loosened and she thought it was about to go?

    As for the, ‘that’s all you get’ comment, and the ‘shy’ smile at the end? I chalk it up to nothing more than a cute comment made by a girl who just about fell out of her top.

    It really doesn’t appear to me as anything more than an end-of-the-show video made by a few people still hanging around. Half the nations young females do worse in a whole let less clothing in clubs, dances, and out in the general public every single day. Seems like she was bored, maybe a little amped up from whatever shoot she just came from and said, “Fuck it, why not?”

    Are of any us really surprised this video went viral? It wouldn’t take a whole lot of advertisement on their part. It would take 2 people less than a week to get this video to a million views. A publicity stunt? Maybe. More than likely a group of people saw this one time and it spread like the plague because it has one of the hottest models to date three-quarters out of her clothes and bouncing all over the place.

    The whole taylor lautner argument is just ridiculous. I personally know more than 1 middle aged woman who pines after each movie since the first and would gladly pull up more sources to defend that argument.

  17. elissa says:

    She is a beautiful and sexy young woman, to be sure. Watching her mannerisms during the brief video, and speculating….she seems to be quite in control for such a young woman: starting from her brief “tada” arm introduction at the beginning, to “wait for it” instruction and direction she provides, to “that’s all you get” at the end of it all.

    She is having fun, enjoys the attention, understands that she is striking, maybe a bit naïve but not for her age – as it should be – but all in all in control.

    “Youth is wasted on the young”, so say the old people.

  18. wellokaythen says:

    That bikini is so tiny that it seems absurd to even go to the trouble of putting it on. Billions of people now know almost exactly what she looks like dancing naked. How is that top any more tasteful than a couple of pasties? (That’s paste-ees, not UK bakery products, which are “past – ees”)

    I think it’s a great video clip. I see nothing wrong with it. I’m certainly not a prude (which is what prudes always say….). However, there’s something lost when there’s nothing left to the imagination. The imagination can be the most exciting thing in your brain. In this video, which I watched voluntarily (and voluntarily every single time I’ve seen it), I’ve basically seen what she looks like naked. I’ve sabotaged my imagination of what she looks like naked. Kind of a shame, in a way.

    • “That bikini is so tiny that it seems absurd to even go to the trouble of putting it on.”

      Well, if we learned anything from Janet Jackson, it’s that nothing is more scandalous than a woman’s nipple. Never mind that it looks exactly the same as a man’s nipple. And never mind that children are all pretty damn used to seeing nipples (but oh we must protect them). Nipple = scandal.

      And don’t even get me started on the ridiculousness of fanny = scandal.

  19. kathryn says:

    As a (non man / attractive woman hating) feminist, I saw this video when my male friends showed me. I *wanted* to be appalled (oh look another woman being objectified) but what I actually thought was…wow…she is HOT and doesn’t look remotely like she is being forced or coerced and is young and having fun and dancing.

    How much better to be smiling and dancing half naked than
    1) hating yourself and being afraid to dance half naked or otherwise
    2) being forced to dance half naked to make ends need
    3) being photo-shopped to look THIS good
    4) being stick thin from starving yourself
    5) living in a society or family that forbids you from being young, half naked and dancing

    I love being young and
    I love dancing

    Why are other women freaking out about this?

    • Eh, I didn’t freak out about it. I was a bit worried with the end bit…like she was suddenly shy and bashful. But otherwise, yeah no problem with it.

Speak Your Mind