From Frau Sally Benz comes the news of the latest "pedia" creation--According to it's about page:
Chickipedia is the world's largest web-based, women-based, wiki-based database of hot chicks on the planet. It is entirely user generated, making it the first female-only encyclopedia of the people, by the people, and for the people. All you have to do is have access to the internet, log on, go to our "Add New Chick" link, and voila—you can create a new article, or revise an existing one. Just be sure to do so within our guidelines or risk being spanked.Sounds offensive enough, right? The odd thing is, as Frau Sally notes--it actually turns out that the site isn't that bad:
Then we move to the gray area... The list of assets includes the standard perky breasts, long legs, nice ass. But it also includes some really awesome stuff like "black belt in Tae Kwan Do" (apparently, Evan Rachel Wood kicks ass) and "ability to manipulate the oppressive constraints of gender" (Hilary Swank kicks ass in a completely different way). Also, the information on the pages I checked out actually seem to not be gross or terribly degrading! I expected to find disgusting sexual innuendos or more vulgarity and grossness, but it seems to actually just have normal information. They have bio info, lists of what the women have been in and who they've worked with, and even give props where it's due. They also include women who I suppose would not conventionally make hot lists, like Jeanne Tripplehorn, Amy Holmes and Rachel Maddow.I appreciated that they had a sports section (of which cheer leading was included as 'sports') and also there there seems to be a really strong diversity of women. I think the fact that it is user generated actually allows for space to open up as to what "hot" actually can be; who said that a user had to be a man, right? And who said that the user had to be the white 20-something man that is traditionally catered to at sites like this? It's funny that when "hot women" becomes defined by thousands of users rather than a few smart ass editors trying to sell magazines, suddenly the definition of "hot" becomes a lot less straightforward. Don't get me wrong--I'm not jumping up and down screaming over a whole website that calls women "chicks" and values "hotness"--but I am intrigued by the idea that what a "hot chick" is traditionally thought of as (young, white, thin, straight) can be challenged through the something as simple as user generated content. What do you think?