Carrie Fisher: No flaws in Star Wars

[dropcap]O[/dropcap]ne of the best things I watched last year was a comedy sketch featuring Tina Fey and Amy Schumer called ‘Last F*ckable Day’ , which satirises how females in the media almost have a time limit on their career. It hits the nail on the head and exposes a blatant, hideously sexist inequality – once women are no longer deemed ‘attractive’ or ‘youthful’, they become less employable.

It came as absolutely no surprise that Carrie Fisher faced backlash about her appearance in The Force Awakens for simply looking older than she did in the original Star Wars trilogy. In fact, I would’ve put money on it.

It’s a shame that there are so many people on the internet who allow the depth of Fisher’s crow’s feet to outshine her amazing career (including involvement in Drop Dead Fred, Lethal Weapon and Austin Powers). It’s been 32 years since Fisher donned that notorious gold bikini, and God forbid that she should have done things other than maintain her figure to please the general public in the meantime.

Why was Carrie Fisher made to wear that shiny get-up anyway? Did it add anything to the plot of the film? No. Of course it didn’t. It was  implemented purely for male titillation.

Notably, no one commented on how Mark Hamill has gained more than a few pounds in the latest installment of Star Wars. Fortunately, the wardrobe department clad him in a flattering and flowing Jedi robe that disguised his less-than-slender figure.

You may have read about the ‘Dad Bod’ trend last year. For those of you that were lucky enough to avoid it, a ‘Dad Bod’ (according to Urban Dictionary) is “a male body type that is best described as ‘softly round’” Note that ‘Mum Bod’ wasn’t a trend because stretch marks from carrying another human being for nine months and slackened breasts from nurturing said human just aren’t cute.

Chris Pratt is the perfect example. When he starred as the lovable, lolloping and podgy Andy in Parks and Recreation, no one told him to put down the burgers and hit the gym.  And when Pratt buffed up considerably for his roles in Guardians of the Galaxy and Jurassic World, he only became more attractive to the masses.

Women are always expected to be aesthetically pleasing. Women’s magazines dedicate entire sections to poking fun at the supposed ‘flaws’ on female celebrities, but also include sections on ‘loving your body’.

These so-called pieces of journalism also idolise ‘unreal celebs’ such as Kim Kardashian. Newsflash – she is literally unreal. Those bulging buttocks and glass-cutting cheekbones are all the work of a highly skilled surgeon, a professional make-up artist and Photoshop.

I can’t say I know much about Kim Kardashian, but all I’ve seen her achieve is marrying the self-proclaimed ‘greatest living rockstar on the planet’ then proceeding to gyrate all over a motorbike with him in the video for the musical masterpiece that was ‘Bound 2’ and starring in a narcissistic television programme depicting her obscene wealth. If you own any of these magazines, I urge you to burn them. They’re much better as tinder than they are as a promotion for healthy body image.