"The Internet in its wisdom has provided GIFs of the best reactions" to the Oscar song-and-dance routine "We Saw Your Boobs"...

"... including Naomi Watts’, perhaps best described as 'the death of a smile'..."



"... and Charlize Theron’s, perhaps best described as 'ice-cold daggers hurled directly from the eyeballs.'"

HuffPo can't tell the difference between nipples and darts.

Because... look!... darts nipples!!!!

If you see nipples, it's because that's what you want to see.

Maybe Anne Hathaway's breathtaking bust darts will bring back traditional style bust darts. It actually is something that looks new in fashion, and it's fascinatingly retro. In the 50s and 60s — before the "natural look" seemed like a good idea — bodices were constructed with darts.



Remember when a size 14 had a 34" bust measurement?! What's 14 today? Something like 40"?

"I guess I just had my first taste of the filthy side of this business."

In the previous post — about the accusation that Oscars host Seth MacFarlane was sexist for singing about "boobs" — I asked: "but what was said about male nakedness?

Commenter EDH pointed to this:

"Were the Oscars always this sexist, or are we spoiled by Tina Fey and Amy Poehler's Golden Globes?"

"Host Seth MacFarlane has been leaning on sexist punchlines all night, and people are noticing. Here are the transcripts, so you can calibrate your outrage and/or eye rolls accordingly...."

That's Maureen O'Connor at The Atlantic. Maybe she's just looking for traffic or a neat framework for presenting some of the jokes from last night's big show, but how can you judge how sexist the jokes are when only the jokes about women are taken out of context? What was said about men?

I know there was a big song-and-dance number naming lots of actresses and the movies where they bared their breasts, but what was said about male nakedness? All of those women chose to display their boobs — to use the word in the song lyrics (which you can read at the link above (video here)) — and they got whatever admiration or career advancement they got. Having taken the advantages offered — perhaps including ousting some other actress with more modesty or less impressive attributes — they're not immune from jokes at their expense.

We make fun of men all the time. It would be sexist to have a rule that you can only make fun of men. So, were there jokes about male genitalia? But male actors don't normally go waggling their willies around in big Hollywood pictures, so it's hard to say what the parallelism would be for "I Saw Your Boobs." (It looks funny to write "male actors," but "actors" is used these days for both sexes. Maybe we could use "mactors" or — I know, it's taken — "malefactors.")

Now, it might have been impolite or in bad taste to call out the names of actresses who were there, proudly seated at this ritual of self-celebration, and to sing out "I saw your boobs" at particular individuals, right when they wanted everyone to think they were such goddesses, in their lovely ball gowns, which were quite possibly designed to make a special show of the very boobage that the song was about.

But that's not the topic of sexism. That's the topic of whether you want the Oscars host to display respect and reverence to the assembled dignitaries or would you rather have some broad comedy that might appeal to the big TV audience? It's a question of taste and a desire to maximize the size of the audience, which was the same question that led to the baring of the boobs in the first place.

ADDED:  I don't really think Maureen O'Connor cares about sexism one way or the other. If she really thought McFarlane's jokes deserved condemnation, she wouldn't have written "are we spoiled by Tina Fey and Amy Poehler's Golden Globes?" — which is also a joke about boobs. I'd condemn that joke for being so stale.

Who was the first person to equate "Golden Globes" and actresses' breasts? The Golden Globes were first presented in January 1944, so I'm betting the joke goes back to 1943. We needed some sexy laughs back in 1943. I'll bet just about anything you might say about breasts was either sexy or funny or both back in 1943. But today? It's hard to say something new. Maureen O'Connor doesn't seem to know how to say something new. McFarlane did. Gasping about how that might have been sexist is really incredibly dull. One thing that actually makes some people sexist is the unwillingness of (some!) women to laugh at themselves. Come on. Laugh at women. Laugh at men. We all deserve it.

"I was put off by all the breasts. The peekaboo-slit-neckline-breast-exposing dress. the breast-on-a-platter strapless dress."

Over at the WaPo slideshow of Golden Globes fashions, one commenter seems a tad breast-o-phobic.

But I'd just like to say that this approach to clothing breasts — inflicted on Jessica Chastain, chastising Chastain — is one of the worst fashion screw-ups I've ever seen. Why didn't anyone see the optical illusion and stop her from leaving the house in that thing?

Tomorrow is my birthday, but today is a day for...

... getting a flu shot — done! — and a mammogram — later. The mammogram is something I'd been putting off, but deciding to go in for the flu shot gave me the push I needed to schedule the mammogram. Dialogue with the nurse:

NURSE: Do you have breast implants?

ME [with slight disgust and amusement]: Nooo! [Changing my tone:] Oh, I mean, I didn't mean any disrespect to the women who have breast implants.

This is the instinctive all-inclusive political correctness I carry about in my daily doings here in Madison, Wisconsin. Not that the nurse would have expressed disapproval if I'd said anything wrong. And I'm not even sure if my self-protective instinctive political correctness is a comic routine. It is something I see myself doing. Sorry if that's TMI on the breasts, but I'm just saying: Come on, everybody, get your flu shots and (if needed) mammograms.

My post title "Buttons offed" made one reader picture "2 hands clasping the lapels of their own jacket and ripping them apart to reveal not a blouse but 2 voluptuous naked breasts."

"Buttons offed, pop pop, that's the image that happens" — says commenter Chip Ahoy, prompting Dr Weevil to say "Photoshop or it (your fantasy) didn't happen."

If he hadn't achieved this status yet — and I think he had — Chip Ahoy became the #1 Althouse commenter of all time — not counting Meade — by producing the Photoshop. (There's a link within that link, so nothing NSFW unless you click again.)

"Malignant cells have not completely forgotten how to be healthy; they just need the right cues to guide them back to a healthy growth pattern."

Which is why squeezing breasts might stop cancer.

Via Instapundit who says, "They haven’t done human trials yet, but I say: Why take chances?" I take it he's recommending mammograms.

Christina Hoff Sommers: "The Affordable Care Act mentions 'breast' 44 times, 'prostate' not once."

"It also establishes an elaborate and expensive network of special programs to promote women’s health. Programs for men are nowhere to be found. What explains the imbalance?"

Possible answers:

1. Focusing on breasts works for everybody: Men love breasts and women feel cared for.

2. Treating women's bodies as a special problem, requiring special attention, works for the most retrograde traditionalists and for progressive feminists.

3. Women tend to monitor their health and consume more health care services, especially these preventive programs. There are no programs for men, because men wouldn't respond to programs. The main use of men is getting them into the insurance pool to contribute to the cost of caring for women and children.

4. Women actually need and deserve more care. Men are expendable. There is a shared social interest in preserving the women for reproductive purposes, for the maintenance of stable households, for the nurturing of children, and for looking after the elderly.

5. Gender politics work, but only on women.

"Letting women 'test drive' larger breasts before a boob job has led to them picking even bigger implants."

Woman who see what life is like with larger breasts (by wearing a big padded bra) end up choosing, on average, breasts 30% larger than what they originally thought they wanted. They tend to come in thinking a C-cup would be right, but end up seeing the D-cup as preferable.

The article makes it seem as though the decision to size up has to do with realizing extra-large breasts won't "interfere with daily life." But I'm wondering whether these women are discovering some social advantages that they are finding persuasive.

In any case, let women choose for themselves what they want. I don't like the idea of cosmetic surgery of any kind, but if you're going to get it, you should decide for yourself how big to go. I'd like to know more about what happens with these breasts over the years. If you're going to choose, you deserve information. There should be photos of how enhanced breasts look after 20 or 30 (or more years) compared to what happens to smallish breasts over the years.

Ah, but young women don't think about that do they? They'll say I don't want to think about how I'll look when I'm 50 or 60. Right?

"Nipplegate: The Exciting Conclusion."

"Huzzah! Facebook reversed the ban on our cartoon!" — writes Robert Mankoff in and of The New Yorker. Facebook censored a cartoon that appeared in The New Yorker. Too much tit! But it's okay now. It was The New Yorker. Come on!

Clinton holds up a finger and says "You will feel it" — in this Drudge juxtaposition.

Here's the whole page frozen in time right now, but let me close in on these 4 photos:



"You will feel it" is — of course — a line from Clinton's convention speech, but illustrated with the finger pointed up, it takes us back to the Lewinsky days, when we heard about finger-shaped things inserted into vaginas and a finger was famously wagged at us for imagining that he had sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

Right underneath Bill Clinton — double meaning right there — is Hillary Clinton, and she's getting "snubbed." The snub is by the Chinese VP, but we imagine other snubs. Additional lines under Hillary's picture have her "dubbed" a "sneaky troublemaker."

And, speaking of troublemakers, we're reminded that Hillary is "half a world away" "[a]s Bill speaks." In case that's not a sharp enough nudge to get you to think about things Bill might do while his wife is away, your eyes are drawn quickly to the swelling bosom of Scarlett Johansson, who is one of "Barack's Angels," who will be on the convention stage tonight. (Scarlett's golden hair rolls and flows all down her breasts, while Hillary's hair, in that other pic, is dull, lank, and flat.) And what else are these beautiful young women up to in Charlotte where Hillary is half a world away? In Drudge tease, the trio of beauties "makes push."

And that push? You will feel it.

IN THE COMMENTS: Paul Zrimsek said:

And here I thought the true caption for the Scarlett Johanssen photo was the line above it, not the line below.

He's referring to: "Advisers lower expectations for convention bounce..."

Photos from the Go Topless Protest at the White House.

Warning, lots of large photos of breasts at the link, which I recommend not for the usual gawking at breasts, but for the careful contemplation of the expression and demeanor of the various women. The pictures tell a story, and each woman is different — not just in the size and shape of her breasts — but in her attitude about joining this demonstration... and the way that attitude evolves as the demonstration progresses and as the various women perceive the differences in breasts and attitudes of the other women. There are some men too... and onlookers taking all the photographs they want, which is part of the evolving scene. It's humanity at its most hilarious. Highly recommended!

CNN puts blurry dots covering the breasts of a woman in a Matisse painting.

The clip is hilarious.

At 0:47, they cut to a voluptuous newswoman in a tight, low-cut shirt. It would have been cool if they'd put blurry dots over her breasts too.

(Thanks to my son Chris for IMing me about that. He says the effect was much more noticeable and ridiculous on HDTV, where he saw it.)

ADDED: Perhaps, like me, you thought of Attorney General John Ashcroft and the $8,000 drapery.

Tattoos.

Lots of interesting photographs here, quite aside from whether the tattoos are wise choices or well done. I love #19, done with a fisheye lens, which shows a man whose large upper arm is consumed by a technically excellent monochrome depiction of the face of Bruce Springsteen. A terrible idea. Sickeningly earnest to me, but the guy is quite pleased with it, and he's at a Bruce Springsteen concert, so there's something charming about it. Horrible and charming.

The next photo — #20 — takes us in a completely different direction:

"Vinnie" Myers specializes in tattooing nipples and areolas onto women who have undergone breast cancer surgery. Using precisely mixed pigments, he creates a perfect 3-D illusion of the real thing...

"Kill this portmanteau now..."

"... Breastaurant."

ADDED: At the link at the link, there's talk of Tilted Kilt, whose CEO Rod Lynch who complains that the word breastaurant "implies that the company's success is based purely on sex appeal."

Rose Dimov, a 22-year-old waitress at Tilted Kilt, says her job is no different from any other waitressing gig; make guests feel special and ensure they have a good time. As an aspiring ballroom dancer, she also says she's not fazed by the revealing outfit that comes with the job. "Going to a restaurant should be an experience," Dimov says. "We're entertainers."

Tilted Kilt — yes, we were talking about kilts yesterday, but remember when Tilted Kilt popped up in the Wisconsin protest story?  Here's a Business Insider article from February 18, 2011.

"Yeah, that’s just who I want helping me out with my legal problems. A guy who technically isn’t even a lawyer yet..."

"... and has absolutely no experience. Experts believe there has been a huge disconnect between the learnings in the classroom and what goes on after passing the bar."

Says The Weakonomics blogger who just had to find the right picture to illustrate his musings.

(Man, I have been working on that Federal Courts take-home exam, with my legal pad, my Pelikan fountain pen, my "Annie Hall" glasses, my self-cut bangs, and my lactating breasts since 1981!)

"What if I want to feel like I have udders?"

"This woman doesn't care what I want."

Let's take a closer look at those porn stars.

Bill Clinton's does a new photo op... that reminds us folks here at the Althouse blog of that old photo op.

Feminists, please weigh in.

ADDED: One of the porn stars, Brooklyn Lee, according to Wikipedia, "appeared in Pink's music video for 'Raise Your Glass' in 2010 with three other LA Direct Models. They were shown blindfolded and being milked to fill a bottle to feed a calf." You can watch that video (after a commercial) here. The image in question looks like this:



Cows!

Feminists, please weigh in.

"If I could turn back time, I would have not chosen Gloria Allred as my lawyer."

Regret about choice of lawyer expressed in Cher lyrics.

Via Instapundit, who notes that the client Debrahlee Lorenzana learned what was always mind-crushingly obvious, that Gloria Allred is in it to get attention for herself.

But then, so was Lorenzano. It takes one to know one is not always true. Look at the photo at the first link. Was Lorenzano fired because of her looks or because she declined to dress in a manner appropriate to the business in which she was employed?