Anyway, I was disappointed by this set of photos and a ... thank-you note to men? Do they really need more credit? I shouldn't be surprised by the photos, especially considering that her advertisements for Weeds usually trade on her body:
It starts out fairly innocuous: with the other members of the ensemble show. But after the first season, it immediately becomes excessively sexual - she's splayed out on the web/bed, wearing a bikini, swimsuit, and high high heels, and naked, with a phallic snake. Women have a right to use their body as they choose, but I think it's sad that a rare women-led ensemble show goes from presenting the whole cast (with the black characters on the margins, duh), to presenting only the lead character, and then basically presenting only her body.
But the photos from Esquire were, comprehensively, a little too much for me:
This is not Parker's first naked-esque photoshoot, and you know, naked photoshoots, in Esquire...not the end of the world. What disturbs me about this shoot in particular are the middle three shots, and particularly the second. Parker's face is not visible barely at all in these photos - she could be a stock model. She's been reduced to body parts - an ass, a belly button, a nipple, all without a distinguishable face. Even in the first and last shots, her face is half obscured, and the viewer's attention is directed at her ass/cleavage.
What's worse is her "thank you letter to men". The letter constructs men as the stronger sex, with little subtlety or dimension, with no qualification defending the strength of women. Here are just a few of the necessary and sufficient characteristics for men:
I don't even have energy for further analysis. Fail.