ah, yes, it’s not like the fashioning of a slavic bimbo as a distinctive american cultural archetype could possibly have any nasty real-life implications. especially considering the socio-economic reality of post-soviet countries. or, say, the fact that the sex tourism industry is primarily driven by american men. or the mere existence of the surrogacy industry - again, primarily catering to american couples. or the still very much existent mail bride industry (that the american audiences apparently find so very entertaining that they've managed to turn it into reality tv). or
girl you are being so silly rn. you think that I as a black woman don't know about the effects of nasty American cultural stereotypes against women. You mean the ones that enslaved all my trafficked ancestors and affect me every day of my life. sorry to break it to you that lesbian black women are still triply oppressed in the real world.
Viv chen is a smart blogger and she critically discusses your points in her article. because that is what the movie anora is about, and she is reviewing it through the real life analog of Melania. You're literally just agreeing with her.
it's not merely stereotypes "against women" - in this particular case and this particular context it's specifically stereotypes against women from non-western countries. you cannot in good faith try to divorce this issue from its broader geopolitical context. nobody disputes the fact that the us structurally oppresses its own citizens and that it's non-white people - especially black and indigenous people, especially women - who are disproportionately affected by those policies. however, implying that it's only white american men (and women! see: the commercial surrogacy industry) who allow the industries built on exploiting the bodies of non-western - because this issue is most definitely not limited to eastern europeans - women to flourish is simply ignorant (and unabashedly us-centric, but that's par for the course on this website). non-white americans (especially those belonging to the upper middle class) are not exempt from the numerous material benefits of living in the imperial core (the mere fact of possessing a us citizenship is just one of them); benefits that they themselves are often unaware of, but that are evident to virtually all non-americans - most of all those living in the peripheral countries.
viv chen's understanding of the actual socio-economic and political realities of post-soviet (and post-communist) countries, as well as the slavic diaspora, is, in fact, deeply superficial (not a crime in itself, but if she wants to try her hand at cultural criticism, she cannot shield herself behind her ignorance); that, and melania and anora have very little in common except for their ethnic background (although russia and slovenia are definitely not analogous) and (somewhat allegedly in melania's case) status as a sex worker. melania might be evil, but she's not dumb, as you claim; neither is anora - she's just desperate, as anyone in her position would be.
she's also using their example (are they really the only two slavic women she could name?) to reinforce (under the guise of deconstructing) this deeply sexist and xenophobic 'archetype'. but it's her attempt at making it look like just another problematic tiktok trend that i find particularly distasteful: she compares them to the tradwives of tiktok - middle-class and upper-middle class women who willingly shill their conservative lifestyle in an attempt to lure young girls into it, all in the name of their reactionary political ideology. how are they in any way, shape or form comparable to women from disenfranchised countries who are driven to sex work by their socio-economic circumstances (themselves often a direct result of american interventionism)? she tries to paint this microtrend of young american women emulating slavic bimbos as simply another bellweather of the reactionary turn in american society, just like those tradwife influencers - but in doing so, she's centring the unduly influenced american audiences rather than the people they fetishise and routinely exploit.
finally, she admits she was never even aware of the slavic diaspora of coney island (despite its being known as little odessa) - nonetheless, she goes on to praise their portrayal in the movie. based on what? the vibes? what makes her the qualified person to talk about not only the portrayal itself, but also the thorny subject of the article, then? what research did she - an upper-middle-class coastal american woman - put into it? it's not smart - it's naive, it's shallow, it's ignorant. it's bad criticism, plain as.






















