Amber Rose is getting her garden plucked all across the social media after trying it with Instagram when she posted a pic of herself dressed in a choker and bikini top while perched across wooden steps draped in oil and sitting on a cloak covering her nude bottom—brazenly exposing her bush.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BVJaU8QhyUy/
In an instant, Instagram got rid of it but not before the swift, quick fingers following her got a hold of it.
Rewind.
After being met with a less than stellar reception, jeers and sneers, what a bold move it was-that this year Amber kept on full steam ahead with her annual #SlutWalk agenda and walk in October.
In revolt and rebutting slutshaming, being spinned as a movement for the empowerment of women the world over, Amber took what (was beginning to) start off as a pattern of disrespect and spun it to her advantage before the disrespect and disadvantage could take roots and grow.
After the public breakup of two famous rap artists: Kanye West and later, her ex-husband baby-daddy Wiz Khalifa the (then), mysterious girl that used to hang on to the arm of Kanye West, gave up her mystery when the rapper got ghost and moved on after cheating on her with Kim Kardashian-to whom he is now married with children.
Although it may very well be coincidental that the two that shared a piece of of Kanye also happen to share the same October 21st birth date, social media wags (and reportedly, Kim herself) are claiming Amber Rose’s recent pic gone viral in her shiny “birthday suit” is a direct rip off of Kim’s Paper Mag shoot where she, too, wore a choker and draped in black and oil all over.
Regardless of how or if true, Kim wishes to insert herself in to this one, we’re gonna give Kimmy her 15 minutes but we can’t deny that Amber stole the day.
The talk of today is how Amber went all out and au naturale with a 70s style cush-bush that upped the awe anty over a mere exposed butt crack and aerolas. This one got the people talking—and broke the Internet for sure.
As mentioned on our Instagram, although this write up is about what ‘qualifies’ a woman to assert herself as the ambassador of feminism and while doing, what that ‘standard’ or ideal “representative” is, on a funny note, Amber brought on the bold and in your face with something opposite what we in pop culture today all rap about, brag about, and rave about as being a grooming essential: the bare vagina.
Like one of my favorite actresses (Alfre Woodard) quips in one of my favorite movies (Beauty Shop 00:04-00:45)…I’m pro-bush. Whether I cop to claiming ‘pro-bush’ for me, is neither here, there or in question, here.
Just sayin’ though, I can’t front because I’m on paper and in ink several times in one book (Angie Situation – Innocence) having mentioned the beauty of hairy twat so, I can’t roll back on my words. But the fact of the matter is-Amber Rose took it there regardless of how you feel about it or Amber Rose. She blossomed all on us lookin’ and ‘shookin’’ asses on this 11th day of June 2017.
If a picture is worth a thousand words, Amber Rose accomplished that.
Here’s how, why, whether or not we should or shouldn’t shame or shun her (and where sh|ts ‘bout to get real):
You see the problem with latching on to, putting forth or even copping to a title is: You’ve got to be prepared be two things: to do the work and moreover, exemplify the title. While it can be between nobody but you and God that you may or may not [be or doing] the work that exemplifies the title, when the world gets its eyes or ears on it, the show is on, so you’d better had been prepared—especially if you do or say or exemplify the antithesis of the title you claim (or just are: mom, teacher, pastor, doctor, Christian, or: feminist).
https://www.instagram.com/p/BVKOT6qAITs/?taken-by=zah_funny
For example, (and by contrast) while a brother or sister can ‘brother’ or ‘sister’ on neutral ground, a ‘mom’ cannot. Because when we claim titles that directly effect our unit ‘to whom are concerned’ (or indirectly) –to whom are affected (or concerned), that’s when the microscope of scrutiny comes in to play and you become fair game for scorn or judgment:
The nudity doesn't offend me.
The suggestion to millions of young women that feminist achievement comes from stripping does offend me. https://t.co/TAPM3E0tTz— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 13, 2017
Why? I've always 100% supported women's rights & gender equality.
I just don't support famous women posting nude pix to 'promote feminism'. https://t.co/Qjuk0szkoV— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 13, 2017
Why do women's magazines persist in encouraging this nonsense? It shames feminism. https://t.co/SlJXFIoE9u
— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 13, 2017
I'm a feminist. https://t.co/16qbMuUMc4
— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 13, 2017
Regardless the title that you chose, claim (or proclaim) it only becomes double-edge sworn (and scorn) when you don’t adapt to, or appear to fit the preconceived notion (or expectation) of the “role.”
When a “Christian” is bible-thumping yet doing, saying (or even posting) from a place in thought and mind with an action and from intention that that Jesus wouldn’t, “Christians” (as a religion) have hell to pay (the same goes for a mom, teacher, pastor, doctor, Christian, or—feminist).
Considering the fact that women have fought the good fight to be seen, heard and respected as gender equals in matters of work/pay and life-in revolt to roles placed upon us as a society that for many years, oppressed the gender. Had it not been for these fights, women wouldn’t be regarded as anything more than objects essential for sex and procreation and cooking and cleaning. Although many strides have been made and women have made moves against accepting roles like such, the fact of the matter is, that idea about women still has not changed in the minds of many.
So when a woman uses her femininity and femalehood such that she is objectified as an “object” too, in the eyes of many, she has set the entire gender 57 years (since the start of the Women Liberation Movement).
Coming from a woman herself who is straddled the fence on whether something as (seemingly) ‘objectifyingly’ harmless as cheerleading being a sport vs. objectification, (and with regards to public nudity e.g posing, stripping) before I dig in, with regard to things like such, I probably need to run you my very complicated list on what I (personally) feel is a kill to feminism, the female gender, the advocates of feminism who too, claim to be feminists and people like Amber Rose:
