World Still Warming; Pageant Candidates Shedding Layers

In continuation of yesterday's entry, two things.

First, New York Times readers respond to the IPCC report on the newspaper's blog. Andrew Revkin, science journalist, readies to answer reader questions; you can still ask some and post your opinions. In the main article today, Revkin is interviewed in a podcast. Revkin is asked, "Should people think about changing where they live at this point?" He responds, with the New York area readership in mind, "Well, the timescales are such that" it isn't necessary right now. Revkin knows what he's talking about: he's one of the most read and respected popular science writers in the US. "And if you're wealthy enough" you can adjust later, he notes matter-of-factly.

He knows it all too well: most of the worst-affected regions are or will be those low-lying areas of the world that are extremely poor. What can a Bangladeshi family do?

When asked about how he feels about the future, Revkin says that he "goes to bed" a pessimist, but "wakes up" an optimist.

Elsewhere in the New York Times today, a columnist wonders if the IPCC report isn't in fact too optimistic. Climate science is advancing fast and we do not really understand the impact of melting glaciers or inland ice sheets. They weren't included in the IPCC measurements.

In the UK, the Guardian notes that "the scientists spoke cautiously, but the graphs said it all."

A tipping-point of public awareness was being reached. The time for talking, as the politicians kept saying yesterday, was over. Now it was time for action.

Although in saying this they were, of course, still just talking.

---

On a completely different note, in a not-so-unexpected turn of events, "public outrage" over the controversial catsuits of the pageant candidates forced the tour organizer to revert back to half nakedness.

You cannot but wonder about the intentions and purpose of some publications, tabloid or otherwise. First of all, on a day when the IPCC report comes out (it would make awesome headlines, guaranteed!), climate change in some of the most widely circulated newspapers is largely left out.

Second, the phrasing and wording in these articles about the Miss Finland pageant... Pageants have often been criticized for being demeaning meat markets. There are certainly interest groups out there that would gladly leave it so and continue business as usual.

Readers aren't dumb.

The tour organizer wants to keep the pageant classy, despite pressure to use the scantily clad young women as bait at various consumer functions. While parading on stage wearing next to nothing, the young women are subjected to a leering, staring public. The public are wearing down jackets, by the way. The organizer doesn't want to take that kind of advantage, so she comes up with new ideas. Some of the events take place in the evening, in dimly lit clubs or restaurants. (How many of us would go to Kaivohuone wearing only underwear? Right.)

To protect the women, the tour organizer has a brilliant idea: nobody defined what kind of underwear the women should wear! So she arranges for them to wear full body catsuits, which is categorized as lingerie.

That, however, isn't enough: an anonymous "public" demands a return to what "we" had before. Why do I think the "public" actually stands for the "media"?

The interesting thing is, the only citation or statement in Iltalehti's article comes from the representative of the lingerie company. Certainly not an example of investigative journalism.

What's more, the wording on the matter suggests that the pageant candidates do this quite willingly, leaving just enough room for doubt in the mind of some readers, I'm sure, that this whole scheme isn't exploitative at all. Who knows, maybe they really want to walk around in their underwear in a car center.

I'm still wondering if the women get paid for this or if they ought to be categorized as unpaid interns or temporary workers.

Missit paljastelivat MIESYLEISÖLLE

2.2.2007 23:58

Mitään ei jäänyt arvailujen varaan, kun missifinalistit esiintyivät alusasuissa. Miss Suomi -kilpailujen finalistit esittelivät rohkeaa alusasumuotia eilen Autotalo Pelttarissa Huittisissa. Autoliikkeeseen oli kerääntynyt valtavasti etenkin keski-ikäisiä miehiä, joille missit tarjosivat aimo annoksen silmänruokaa.

Yleisön kommentit muotishowsta olivat tyrmääviä, joten Miss Suomi -kiertueesta vastaava mallimamma Marjo Sjöroos joutui taipumaan vaatimusten edessä: missit laitettiin jälleen paljastaviin alusasuihin.

- Näin jatketaan päivänäytöksissä. Iltaisin misseillä pysyy trikoot alusasujen alla, vaikka minua heitettäisiin kananmunilla päähän. En halua, että humalaiset miehet koskettelevat missejä iltanäytöksissä, Marjo Sjöroos totesi.

All of this reminds me of an experience a year or two ago. JCDecaux, the French multinational billboard corporation put up a lingerie campaign that brought on huge criticism in Scandinavia. The campaign featured a headless torso of a woman, with the text "I like boobs" on it.

I mean, on her.

Always easier to objectify when you cut someone's head off. Now that's class.

At that time, I called the clothes manufacturer (no response there) and the local Helsinki transportation authority to express my disapproval as a consumer of transportation services. "It's annoying," I said.

The HKL PR person was very sympathetic, but she said there is nothing she or HKL could do. I was surprised. "You guys own the bus stops, though, don't you?" I asked. "What do you mean there's nothing you can do?" I thought it sounded kind of odd: they are Helsinki bus and tram stops and this is the Helsinki transportation authority, so how come?

"What do you mean you can't control what posters people put up?" I asked. She said that they are indeed HKL bus and tram stops, but as far as advertising goes, it isn't that simple. JCDecaux, the corporation, has bought or leased the advertising space and the company decides what kind of advertising to put up. JCDecaux, the overseas corporation, decides who greets you at the bus stop: a milk carton, a mascara or perhaps a pair of mammaries. The corporation is in charge of what our living environment looks like, because they have bought that space.

The lady at HKL engaged in a good and spirited half-hour conversation with me. It was good fun and she was sympathetic, but she apologized for not being able to do much else.

---

Some thoughts from a former Miss Finland here.

Yksi Miss Suomen keskeisistä tehtävistä on toimia esikuvana tytöille. Millä tavalla Miss Suomi on parempi esimerkki tytöille kuin esimerkiksi Naisasialiiton aktiivit?

- Missi on neutraalimpi esikuva nuorille tytöille kuin naisasialiiton aktiivit. Heillä on paljon enemmän negatiivisia asioita, joita he yrittävät tyrkyttää nuorille tytöille, kun ajavat vain naisten asioita.

- Naisasialiiton aktiivit nostavat esiin paljon huonoja juttuja, jotta he voisivat edistää heidän omaa"hyväänsä". Missin rooli on loppujen lopuksi yhteiskunnallisesti aika pieni. Hän on kaunis ja saa jotain kivoja liitetöitä, mutta ei ole poliittisesti vaikuttava, eikä kannusta teinityttöjä tietyn ideologian alle. Sen vuoksi missiin on turvallisempi samaistua kuin jonkin järjestön edustajaan.

It's always interesting to see someone take an institution and assume it is value neutral just because that institution doesn't talk about its politics.