What other dungeon is so dark as one’s own heart! What jailer so inexorable as one’s self? * Nathaniel Hawthorne

They say the mighty can fall hard. But, really, how mighty is, or was, Paris Hilton? Sure she was thee glamour girl with her own perfume, handbags and fans; but, how did she, really matter in respect to substantial events and important social issues that have serious consequences? She didn’t and doesn’t—she was not even a light-weight.

Nevertheless groundswells of people (thanks to our media lords instigation) have demanded justice—that is that she be kept in jail for driving with a suspended license. Thus passion for justice in this democracy is finally out in full force!

It is “fair” that the fair-haired do her time as penalty, that is in a culture that claims to value equality before the law.

However, how serious is this Hilton drama in relationship to, for example, the deliberate distortion, for years, by media pundits who downplayed, and twisted the truth, regarding the seriousness of global warming? Or if the masses are so adamantly passionate about justice then why is there not more uproar on how corporate news deliberately played a important part in deceiving the American public into the Iraq disaster? Where is the equality before the law when it comes to the high and mighty of the corporate media industry and special interests that have brought the American people dire consequences?

Nevertheless media has deemed it time to kick the Barbie doll again. And to highlight this reality Sara Silvermen (a Jewish brunette known for raunchy humor) has gained more fame as she took a cheap shot at Paris Hilton (America’s Barbie look-alike blonde), prior to Hilton’s first jail check-in, June the 3rd. At this red carpet gala and media production of MTV Movie Awards in Los Angelos, Silvermen said (and although her stated idea is somewhat funny it was delivered in a plain and mean spirit), something to the effect:

“... The jail (staff) were trying to accommodate Paris by painting the jail bars to look like penises so she would feel more at home ... but they were concerned that she might ruin her teeth” ...”

One can not deny that this line is funny but the manner of how Silvermen delivered it, and in the presence of a public audience, and also in the presence of Paris Hilton herself as part of the audience, was not uproariously funny—but meant to stab like a fist to her belly. Intuitively then, Silverman’s motive, was a calculated attempt to humiliate Hilton in front of other people (and world knowing it would be filmed). Later this recording was part of “newscast” infotainment that was equally worded to belittle and humiliate Hilton’s reputation.

Granted, few people have much empathy or sympathy for “ditzy” Paris Hilton. Her loyal fans have been referred to, via the corporate media, as “Paris-ites”.

Yes she has made bad choices along the way that were and are now being rubbed in her face. And no doubt many are relishing her own admission to her previous “dumb” behavior (reinforcing the substantial prejudice of “dumb-blonde”).

In fact there has been an active buzz to get any and all dirt on her for quite a while. This is to say there has been a deliberate attempt to “frame” Hilton’s personality and reputation via the gossip columns—in the least becoming manner.

Yet she will likely benefit from legal intervention and she likely has been humbled.

Neither did Hilton’s own attitudes and behavior elicit much regarding sympathy.

Yet this culture needs to look deeper into the mirror because a lot of the media systematic ridicule and sarcasm towards her over the months has blistered with a hatred of her—and the question is why and what does this amount of animosity suggest about our culture? Or are we to settle of staying in the comfort zone and accepting the excuse that it was just public’s right and passion for justice? Because if we are so strident for justice the current white house administration and much of Congress would be out of business—would they not? Or is this just circus and bread to distract the American public from playing any real role in what happens to this culture?

Yet we have a mirror her in front of us. So why do, or did, Americans, especially some women, hate or envy Paris Hilton so much? More importantly what does overt and covert hatred say of those that are so disposed—especially of rich, famous, and somewhat vacuous blonde women?

Because people who are truly superior do not do not make it their mission in life to attempt to make other people feel inferior. Yet the tabloid media gossip columns in the major newspaper of late have made it their mission to print the dirty laundry on people—especially famous blonde (or died blonde) women—why?

Is it simply that Paris Hilton acted conceited and may have been anti-social within her star role as the world’s number one Barbie doll? No. There are many people who have these qualities of conceit and anti-social personalities—perhaps even Sara Silvermen? There has to be something else going on for the country and main stream media to get so involved in this? And it could be several factors that at least throw interesting things to contemplate.

Really, so what if Paris Hilton is a beautiful Barbie Doll, and was born of super-rich parents, and was keenly famous and admired and even lusted after? So what if she could attract many a man’s eye and hormonal attention? So what if she was something of a shallow rebel? And so what still if Paris Hilton is a sex symbol or fancies herself as such? Furthermore so what if she seems to enjoy sexual activity with men to a point of giving fellatio and instance being filmed? Plus so what if she is full of herself and conceited and shallow? Why should all or any of this bother other people so much? Why not cheer that at least somebody has heaven on earth?

Will this justice before the law via focus on minorities versus rich white folk truly contribute to real justice? Will her episode then make things right? If she does her time will we all feel the system has been improved?

Granted she ought to do her jail time like anyone else—but how many other wealthy citizens have skipped out on ease because of their socio-economic situation? Why then did Hilton become a scapegoat pariah to be singled out by Corporate Media?

Or could it be because there is a hatred of blondes and in this society that seldom gets discussed? Or broaching such an ideas a kind of justice that America doesn’t want to talk about? Could there exist out there a frustration that there is an inequality in sexual attraction in which some get the lion’s share and there for blonde women especially are open game? Or is this Hilton soap opera simply about one woman who acts conceited with a show of excess pride in life’s inherent unfairness?

Or is it because of her birth into wealth (not her choice but fate) that Ms. Naive and 26 is now suppose to become thee invincible defender of liberal economics in which outcomes are unequal? And if she fails is she then to be a scapegoat for every girl that hated of Barbie doll with it feminine presumption of American dream? (After all Paris acted and looked like a narcissistic Barbie Doll in real life did she not?) Still why should her personal character defects become the entire world’s concern?

Why not vent anger at the Hollywood /Media system that makes sure every star and singer needs to have the looks first? Why not blame the media / paparazzi / tabloids that splash movie stars in their latest dresses at umpteen awards shows (all like dressed up like dolls) when in fact many of these supposedly intelligent women are dressed to often look like freaks? Or why not vent anger at the huge cosmetic and clothing industries?

The fact is that glamorizing women is a U.S. wide phenomenon. Look at how many millions of women waste time and money getting nails down and expensive hair jobs? Further it very much seems that there are a “lot” of America’s young women who harbor an “excess” conceit about their physical attractiveness and thus their worth—and they ain’t all blonde—not by a long shot.

Actresses of integrity ought boycott news media and Hollywood bootlicking in which they glorify women as fantasy objects. In fact it seems there ought be some serious lawsuits against the paparazzi crowd that go so far as to endanger movie stars lives (as they strife to escape their constant surveillance). So why are not these hanger-oners, who won’t get a real job, prosecuted for being the stalkers and identification thieves that they are? (And notice, months ago, how little the media raised a stir when Paris Hilton’s private telephone calling list was electronically stolen from her cell phone. Apparently it did not matter that her rights were violated because after all she is just a dumb blonde?)

Yet given the course of human nature the trophy was had—Paris Hilton was caught bawling in living color photography like the little girl that she seemed—much to the delight of the plebes—as America newspaper media found it fit to showcase her on the front page of their newspaper. Yes the narcissistic blonde bitch (to quote a few citizens) who got all the attention had crashed down to earth like a small and fragile meteor.

Yet was it not feminists that were so singularly concerned about how “men” looked at women—seldom suggesting that women also judged women? But who was becoming especially gloating now?

But apparently there is something exhilarating about helping to “create” a celebrity’s reputation in the first place just so the same public relations industry can later tear it down. Like the hollow platitude that in a democracy every voter has a right to an opinion (not matter how ill-informed) so to every news media hack (who has never even been even elected by a public) has a right to add their own innuendos to whatever circus. And since celebs get media attention and space then the industry somehow comes to think that they “own” celebrity people and that it is their job to judge them and set the standards on their behavior.

Yet how coincidental that PR pack dogs came so quickly to demand that Scooter Libby (American Jewish Neocon) be pardoned for what he did. And how coincidental that those that are demanding his jail release the most are of the same right-wing, Jewish American Neocon and media cabalists that “conspired” to take us into this war in the first place? Apparently if your patriotism is first to Israel—even at the expense of real U.S. national security—then you should expect to get a get out of jail card?

Yet isn’t it a conceit that some American Jews (especially of the right and authoritarian wing) think they can violate America’s autonomy and independence to a constant double standard of sacrificing American lives and security on behalf of Israel? This is done year after year and is considered OK with a wink and a nod?

Israel gets billions of dollars and military assistance with no strings attached—even if they violate serious human rights. Neocons inside the beltway, many who are strong advocates of what Israel wants, conspired to take us into war with Iraq and now they want us to sacrifice our blood with a pre-emptive war with Iran using nuclear bunker busters (like a Hitlerian move).

Furthermore Israeli propaganda that has spend years convincing us Americans that Israel’s enemies (Arabs and Muslims) are America’s enemies—yet Israel worked hard to make her enemies.

And when AIPAC spies on our country they still have the nerve to look us in the face and call us their friends? So people like Novak (the person who disclosed Valery Plame’s occupation in his syndicated column) and Kristol “demand” Scooter Libby be pardoned? Yet because they are Jewish of a special interest (that actually goes against much of the majority of Jews) they expect this double standard of inequality of justice to prevail? Where is the outcry for justice here—it is not because it is being eclipsed by Paris Hilton’s moon face tears?

Or speaking of journalists setting standards why was hardly nothing reported about the fact that Norman Finkelstein did not get tenure at DePaul college recently? Is it because the master plagiarizer and torture advocate Alan Dershowitz wrote a letter to that board demanding he not get tenure? (Finkelstein’s book Beyond Chutzpah refuted Dershowitz’ bad scholarship.) Or why was there little discussion about Finkelstein’s book The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering in our newspapers? Real tragedy is about noble people being hurt—for example people like Norman Finkelstein who believe in real justice and have the courage to go against the juggernaut sanctimoniousness of the right-wing Christian and Jewish camps.

But it was face slapping that stole the show in our manipulative news. And isn’t rather ironic that Silvermen made a dirt joke about Hilton’s sexual reputation close to the U.S. capital of the porn industry—just north of Hollywood where the film professionals can moonlight their skills?

One wonders if Sara Silvermen would have had the same level of motivation to humiliate brunette Linda Lovelace had she been the current celebrity arrestee? But apparently Linda was, in her day, making money on pornography—and apparently making lots of money in the sex industries is usually considered legit by American capitalist standards.

What is it then about people like Paris Hilton that it is considered OK to let loose and over exploit? Could it be that that there are no stigmas in respect to belittling blonde women?

Further, the snide comment of whether Hilton will ruin her teeth on penis figured jail bars gives us something else to ponder—another example that refutes the dogma righteous feminists screamed, non-too-quietly, that it was “men” who labeled women “whores” if some women threatened the social system with their sexual appeal or appetites. Whereas here again we see another case of a woman labeling a woman a whore (as public humiliation) because Paris Hilton is noted for being a sex symbol and is supposed to have engaged in video display of overt and sexual behaviors like fellatio. (As if a women doing fellatio were really a big and uniquely terrible deal when hundreds and thousands of men and women make money on a variety of sex acts in pornography that more than a few are willing to watch).

How many snide jokes are we hearing about professional male jocks who have been known to have slept with dozens or more of various women? Few people are ribbing them as whores are they?

And how come Hilton’s life and personality has become so politicized to such a public spectacle? Is it because she is considered dumb? Or is it because she has been criticized as a flake doing nothing constructive—just being a rich “socialite”. Well how many rich rap artists are being criticized for their narrowness? You could say some rap artists have an excess of ego and conceit? They, as a whole, are not going out of their way to educate Americans on principles of science or philosophy are they?

In fact mainstream corporate media has “dumbed down” the real news part of the news. There is now less emphasis and budget on international news. There is less emphasis on serious national news. MSM has conspired to let Americans not be too concerned with important issues—the strategy is to allow Americans to not worry about real governance. Rather just bedazzle the naive with propagandist sound bites.

Meanwhile how many gossip circus columnists are going to lose their jobs in this dumb downed industry where more and more staffs are being cut? (Can’t wait to read End Times: The Death of the Fourth Estate by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair via CounterPunch.org)

Regarding Hilton the point is this: a person who has good self-esteem and a life one feels fairly content with is not going to be much bothered with other peoples’ success and/ or egotism (even if people like Hilton got their rewards unfairly). A healthy ego does not spend a life in a gutter of envy and hatred, or shoot daggers at other people (even if those people admired don’t seem to deserve admiration).

Furthermore why all this shaming hypocrisy necessary? Shaming of sexual freedom is one reason why so many people in this culture act like prudes or act all show and no go. There is a certain emotionally frigidity to living this country—one is always vulnerable to be called some kind of whore or pervert. The fact is there is too much shaming about sexual appetite in this society. Shaming via reputational humiliation can be understood as a form of psychological rape.

Was not some of the hatred against Madonna really a form of envy of not being as inhibited as her and presumably as sexually satisfied? It ain’t like we live in this sexually mature and satisfying sanctuary—is it?

Therefore could it be that there is an envy that fears some “types” of women are seemingly getting more social and sexual pleasure then are others—not to mention other kinds of attention that people in general want or need? So lets bash the blondes—especially since it is not considered racist or taboo to do so!

Meanwhile Stephanie Rosenbloom of the New York Times News Service wrote:

“Well before they experience puberty, children today are deeply immersed in the dirty laundry of celebrities ... vast amounts of gossip, particularly about Hollywood’s so called bad girls—Hilton, Spears, and the latest rehab poster girl, Lindsay Lohan, ... is leading the impressionable 8-to-12 year olds in the gutter. But the reality is more complex...”

Plus once again it has been announced that “Blondes are out.” That has got to be worth something? So let’s have some justice since we are so desperate—let’s at least get it out in the open—that there is a definite undercurrent of hatred and envy toward blonde women who are considered sexually attractive and get too much male attention. Let us at least admit that there is some truth to this idea rather than brushing it under the rug?

And let us further question if some of this underground envy does not have some dark undercurrents?

Would it be OK, for example, to suggest that some certain black male thinks he is God’s gift and stud to women—as acceptable—without at least a suspicion of a racist attitude? Or is it OK to make demeaning remarks of super wealthy professional athletes because they act like immature jerks on or off the field? Yet they get plenty of attention as heroes admired.

Or how many women would question overt or covert racism motivation on the presumption of penis size as attention getter (whether healthy or otherwise) and imagined concomitant racist behavior by some men even to a point of lynching? How many people who say—that is asinine thought? Yet why are attacks on the aphrodisiac of blonde hair and Barbie doll body not even considered of any significance like a hate crime—even if not physical attack in the male sense?

Can not psychological aggression not have capacity for damage or terror? Why do slander and libel laws exist if reputation and self-esteem are not important issues for the human psyche?

But this society pretends that there is nothing serious about hatred, teasing, and rumor mongering when it comes to blonde women—that is it is just words—and besides they deserve it. Therefore any and all mean behavior is acceptable if it is directed at what many presume as “dumb” blondes (or avidly look for such signs and rumor monger accordingly).

Perhaps that too is exactly part of the issue. Paris Hilton is not a genius. Intellectually she seems a little slow or mediocre. Well all the more reason to be hyper-critical? After all then all your are doing is picking on the weak—and how superior you must feel in doing that? That must really raise you up as you tear her down. So impressive are you.

Whereas if you really were superior or spiritually content you would not be wasting your time with such a shitz-tizzy in the first place—in tearing other people down like you were some Nemesis Goddess—would you—rather you would occupy your mind with issues that matter.

Or maybe there are many children of the wealthy, and not-too-bad-off, that feel guilty about getting a cushy ride in a world in which many hungry people would love to even have jail food? Maybe there are even some JAPs who have had it kind of easy in this American economy—that is where as much as 1/6th the world lives in slums. Afterall there is no short list of rich Jewish Americans relative to other ethnicities of millionaire and billionaires? Or are we to believe that Jewishness itself is automatically worthy of social respect (none of which are part of that ilk thought to be mall manikins and bitch bimbos like Hilton)?

Or perhaps maybe much of America has a self esteem problem in general? Or would you say that most Americans have healthy and realistic levels of quality self-esteem and self-regard?

Or why then is there so advertising of late in the ballooning cosmetic industries that offer plastic surgery, liposuction, weight loss, breast augmentation, hair removal, perfect teeth, hair coloring, tummy tucks, etc.?

Why does it seem that women are “stuck” on their level of physical beauty (and comparing themselves to others primarily in this realm) and not as concerned about psychological beauty? Where are the bloated industries catering to improving self-acceptance, such as gaining a sense of humor and perspective, or gaining awareness outside the self that makes one interesting because one lives in issues and realities beyond one’s small world.

Image perfectionism here is betrayed by a world of glimpsed snobbery. There are all kinds of snobs (that is people who use elitist criteria to place a wall between themselves and others). So although there are many people who have a healthy doses of pride in their achievements, there are also plenty who suffer from snobbitis. We have fashion snobs, athlete snobs and health snobs, beauty and model snobs, learned health diet snobs, spiritual and yoga snobs, intellectual snobs, socio-economic snobs, being-seen-with-the-right-crowd snobs, being-seen-in-the-right-places snobs, art snobs, poetry snobs, music snobs, chic poverty snobs, political snobs, etc.

But blonde snobs are a special breed meant for revenge. Take the jaundiced yellow journalism that just had to reveal to the public the dirty laundry of Nicole Smith’s personal diaries and also the fact that her medications included a prescription for genital warts. Yes this was a “must” know category of information (nothing personal) for the public on such a famous playmate. Why not bury her to be a whore and unhappy women she now seems—maybe then we will feel better.

Or consider gossip about Reese Witherspoon’s or Spear’s marriage collapse, or media scat columns scolding Witherspoon with Dworkian dogma and scowls to her priggish reasons chosen to diet (to make “him” know what he was missing). AND YOU THOUGHT THE EDITORIALS WERE SANTIMONIOUS!

Still there is a human need for human acceptance, respect, and admiration—even for dumb, rich, bitches. Because we are much the same deep down are we not—and was that not the message of those that liked to preach to us about prejudice—especially in the media?

Why then has a woman’s jealousy become so shrill as to think that sexual and physical appeal is “all” that men care about—or that such fears can not ever conceive of power of competition residing in a broader perspective?

How often did we hear about how it is “men” who treat women like sex objects? Yet how much time, money and energy do women put into clothing, cosmetics, appearance, exhibitionistic clothing, etc. (not that there is something wrong in it)? But what gender really invests so much resource in this realm of physical attraction?

True enough the brightest of colored flowers are supposed to be more competitive to attract bees—but should Paris Hilton be the scapegoat for all people who hate the reality of competition? Hilton did not invent competition any more than sexist pig males invented hormones.

Hilton represents to us a blatant fact—that a woman does not have to be smart to get ahead—that is if she is sexy. Blonde women climb the social latter and they do not have to be so smart or meritorious. But we lie as a society to not recognize just in fact how many blonde women are smart and meritorious. Rather we like to say they are submissive, or dumb, or whatever.

So not only does Paris Hilton defy Andrea Dworkin’s nightmare of sexy women acting outside of victimhood—she brings out to us a mirror of femaleness and femininity—that women conspire to gain in sexual and beauty power—and are equally out to destroy those who are vulnerable.

With all these past decades of feminist tirades about female “victims” as sexual objects there was little discussion about how equally rejecting women were of men—and all the criteria they concocted (on whatever ideological or psychobiological explanation) as to reject men as not good enough. So let us have some justice in this department?

Yes they had plenty of their own prejudiced criteria on how they judged men—not just how they looked and dressed—but their manners, jobs, connections, money, etc. In fact the more demanding some women seemed of the men, to be considered of even worthy of proving their worth, the more demanding many these women were on themselves.

How difficult it must be to expect perfection in the self and then equally in any potential mate? Especially is this so given the fact that most people have chinks somewhere in their armor (and God’s knows us men do)? Nor was it just “object” criteria men were equally up against—but there were also many prejudices well established against men as well.

So is then not part of the problem—that some think they can not enjoy life unless they are some kind of perfect model of perfection—or they needed to have lived a perfectly acceptable life with no embarrassing mistakes?

It seems this shame-based society can not well accept personality flaws and imperfections like so many glaringly see in Paris Hilton. Do Americans carry well maintained resentments and find it hard to forgive and heal?

Maybe Paris Hilton was or is obnoxious and conceited. But so what? Who really should care? And if she is so shallow then why not teach her about gaining some depth and perspective?

We should ask ourselves in the midst of this media feeding frenzy this question—is there such an excess of stress of dealing with the media for many of these young celebrities that such stress leads some toward drug and alcohol abuse?

Therefore we should examine this paradox because it is worth considering: if so many of us find it difficult to understand how Paris Hilton’s brain wiring has such a difficult dealing with plain jane reality—perhaps we ought to ask the greater and more important question—how come many of us of this same culture can not imagine why so many people in other countries around the world can not understand why Americans in general can not deal with reality on the ground? Afterall are not many of us equally spoiled as well—that is on a worldly scale and in a historical sense? And is not our own delusional state much more serious and far-reaching than one lip-glossed Barbie that entertains us so well to be distracted?

We like our cheap energy. We like our fat lifestyles. We take it as granted that we should be entitled to this health benefit and that human right. We take it for granted that our luxurious life styles will go on forever. Few talk about tightening the belt.

Rather we whine about the corruption that ultimately resides in each of ourselves as if it is out there. Yes We like our individually wrapped catsup and creamer packages and throw away Styrofoam cups. We like our cars and suburban sprawl. We take for granted the technology, infrastructure, and resources. We seldom even appreciate something so regular as a hot clean shower delivered to our homes (or our jails).

Yes we too allowed the corruption and the torture—because we voted for our lifestyles and did not demand to know the ugly truths about how our hoarding lifestyles created hell for others.

More importantly we allowed the corporate media to become corrupt and part of the main problem—so we, by all means, need a histrionic scapegoat to keep us in our deluded sleep and escapism. And why not Paris—at least she is easy to look at—even when she cries. Plus naturally we relate well to her because we are all cry babies after all.

P.S. Permission to copy and email granted. A.N.