Hot moms have sold out
Posted
December 5, 2006 at
4:06 am by
Jessica
In an effort to set the feminist movement back a hundred years, a strange Botox triangle aims to destroy the spirit of MILFs (muthas I’d like to %$#@) which includes the tutor of Pierce Brosnan’s children, the television pilot for “The Hottest Mom in America” and the pharmaceutical company that sponsors the Botox competition. Apparently, the business of vanity and mammas = law suits. The former celebrity brat tutor is Jessica Denay, who has founded www.hotmomsclub.com (and here I thought she stole the idea from us!) and wrote the book, “The Hot Mom’s handbook: Mom’s Have more Fun!”. She’s whoring branching out from celebrity endorsements to radio and TV shows (who would have ever guessed!). She’s trying to trademark the term, “Hot Mom” and “Hot Moms Club” and feels the show cheapens her branding. (I don’t think it’s the show actually.)
How do you trademark “hot mom” anyway? Does that mean nobody can ever write that again? I never got that…
So, hot moms are suing each other. I hope that it all results in a bunch of bitch slapping, cat fights and girls and men running like girls. Man, MILFs have really sold out.
“Hottest Mom in America” Audition
Tags: Botox, Hot-moms-club, hottest-mom-in-america, Jessica-Denay, MILF, MILF Resources |
10 Responses to “Hot moms have sold out”
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately in an effort to remove commercial messages, irrelevancies, excessive foul language, racist/sexist/hateful comments, spoofed/cloaked IPs and/or personal attacks and will be edited/deleted at our discretion. Thank you for your patience.
1. Jack said:
December 7, 2006 @ 8:53 pm
Wow. You’re ridiculous. A couple of points…first, Jessica Denay is an amazing person. She is a fantastic mother to Gabriel, a wonderful friend to everyone she knows and honestly cares more for people she doesn’t know than most people do for their own families. A simple request: please don’t ascribe “anti-feminist” qualities to someone you don’t know based on the “character” you’re trying to portray and the MILF “sell out” story you’re trying to create. Jessica is an articulate, graduate-school educated, completely self-made person with a great family and a heart of gold that is raising her son by herself. Have you walked in her shoes before throwing around judgments like she’s “whoring” herself out? My guess is you haven’t. The HMC business was completely Jessica’s idea, and she started it as a service for other single mothers to have a place to learn and share experiences with each other. (I personally witnessed Jessica developing the idea with her friend Joy.) If anything, Jessica represents someone that feminists should aspire to be. She totally respects women for who they are as PEOPLE. In Jessica’s view (and in every interview she’s given), being “hot” has nothing to do with one’s appearance. It has to do with their self-respect, self-confidence, self-esteem and the way they treat others. Is Jessica beautiful? Yes. Is she successfully growing her business? Yes. Gee..THERE are some things to insult someone about! Oh my gosh…she’s a beautiful CAPITALIST…in the United States! Alert the authorities!
Now for the basic lesson: Your obvious envy does not give you the right (but lucky for you, the First Amendment does) to say that another person is “whoring” something out by trying to protect valuable intellectual property in connection with growing a business. In fact, it’s disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself. Jessica is the furthest thing from a “whore” one could ever meet. Now, I’m sure you don’t believe me, but YET again, I know her…you don’t.
Second, the company sponsoring the television show has nothing to do with Botox. Botox is made by Allergan (a company in California that’s been around for over 50 years), and the Arizona company that makes Restylane is the one sponsoring the show (cheesy it is, but it’s not Allergan). Allergan, in fact, derives most of its revenue from eye care products, and the Botox market demand is what’s driven the growth of that product. Allergan only very recently began advertising for Botox, and it’s $120 stock price means they’re obviously serving SOME public need. Wait…yet ANOTHER capitalist trying to grow a business…are you sure you don’t want to call Allergan a “whore” as well? Neither Jessica, Allergan nor Botox have anything to do with this “competition.” Check your facts.
Finally, Pierce Brosnan’s kids are not “celebrity brats.” Paris and Dylan are great kids and Jessica has had a tremendously positive impact on their lives. Again, you probably don’t believe me…but just like before, you don’t know them. I do. I’m sorry to disappoint you with all of this information, but it’s galling to see someone make such an uninformed commentary in such a condescending, authoritarian (but alas, sadly mistaken) tone.
Have a wonderful day…and best of luck with all that envy. Unfortunately, however, my guess is that it only gets worse for you.
2. Jessica said:
December 7, 2006 @ 9:49 pm
Blush. Thank you!
3. melissa said:
December 14, 2006 @ 10:35 am
that’s the most absurd, heavy-handed response to an opinion piece I’ve ever seen. Jack, you make yourself look like a flaming asshole, and bring down the friend you are “defending”. Sad. You mistake sarcasm and witty turn of phrase for literal meaning. Learn to reign it in, pal. It doesn’t take a G.E.D. to understand that “whoring” and “Botox” are not literal statements/slurs, but figurative terms the author is using to describe societal trends. (Some lingo for you (I know, English words that deviate from their literal meaning to have social connotations is difficult, but please bear with me): “If someone is “whoring” something, it means they are doing it repetitively. Normally, to be classified as whoring, the action being carried out is annoying someone else. See also, “Selling Out”" / “Botox, beyond the definitions for Brand Name and Proceedure, can also be used to refer to superficial people, actions, ideas, etc.”– I pulled those quickie explanations down off urbandictionary.com, for your benefit… still with me?)
By the way, some (no, a LOT) of people would argue that there IS something wrong with unbridled, unashamed, Capitalist greed. I know, not in YOUR circle of friends (who you like to tout: “you don’t know these people, but I DO! Na-na-na-naaa-na, I hang with celebrities”. Really spoiled.
I don’t necessarily agree with the original statements made. But Jack obviously doesn’t understand the value of alternative PR methods. After reading the post, I was about to click on the link to Jessica’s “Hot Mom’s Club”. However, after reading Jacks ridiculous, petty, ignorant, and just plain rude comments… I’m really turned off from learning anything more about Jessica Danay. Good job, flamer.
(No, I’m not I’m not sending sexual slurs in your direction. I know that you have trouble with these nuances, so for your benefit, once more: “Flamer”, 1. An outgoing homosexual, who is very open with his gayity. 2. A person who, on a message forum of some type, attacks and flames other members of the forum for any of a number of reasons. A real Flamer usually attacks threads because he/she disagrees with the content of the thread or the lack thereof. The difference between a Flamer and somebody who merely disagrees is that a flamer is inappropriate in their responces.”
4. Mom101 said:
December 15, 2006 @ 6:41 pm
I can only say that I’ve had some correspondence with Jessica and she seems both lovely, smart, and very committed to promoting mothers who are doing great–decidedly feminism-approved–things with their lives. I don’t think this is a fair assessment of the content of her site. If anything the name “hot moms club” is misleading. Or perhaps brilliant marketing? It got you writing about it, after all.
The hottest mom show makes me want to vomit. And not in an “anorexica is sexy” kind of way. But the website? I think it’s pretty cool.
Just one gal’s opinion.
5. Jessica said:
December 15, 2006 @ 9:26 pm
Okay listen up Jessica Denay lovers. Lighten up. This post was tongue-in-cheek. I promise you I don’t care about Jessica Denay or her “brilliant” hot mom’s club. IP has had a MILF resources section on here for quite some time, so obviously I’m not down on it. (However, I do think it’s ridiculous that she’s suing that stupid show. Grow some confidence. She obviously sees them as a threat for some reason.)
6. Jack said:
December 16, 2006 @ 8:10 pm
So…anytime a corporation sues to protect its intellectual property and trademarks, you would argue that it’s a move based on a lack of “confidence”??? Why even have intellectual property if competitors can exploit it without consequence?
As for the Melissa post above: It made me laugh. Thanks..but I don’t respond to people who use words like “gayity” and “responce”…apparently, it’s Melissa that needs to pick up a dictionary (or at least use a spell-check). Poor girl. That being said, I was able to sift through her butchery of the English language and reach the substance…where I found her capitalism-bashing disturbing. Put down your well-worn copy of “Das Kapital” (you can look that up while you’re looking up the correct use of “unashamed”…I think you meant “unabashed”), and join us here in the United States. Have a terrific day!!
7. Jessica said:
December 17, 2006 @ 7:31 am
Well, first of all Jack, I think your friend is going to have a hard time trademarking “hot mom”, but aside from that, I don’t have a problem with corporations suing to protect “intellectual” (wow, now that’s stretch) property, but in this case, I think it’s smacks of narcissism and poor judgement. Obviously this show is not a competitor, nor is it putting her brand in danger, IMO. The general public does not equate Jessica Denay with every resemblance of “hot mom” in the universe.
8. Jack said:
December 17, 2006 @ 10:51 am
Why does it smack of narcissim? Corporations trademark catch-phrases all the time (I note for your reference that the term “intellectual property” has nothing to do with “intellect”–the phrase is merely used to distinguish ownership of an “idea” (i.e., patents and trademarks) versus ownership of “real property” (land) or “personal property” (movable, tangible “things”).
The point of trademarking phrases is to keep competitors from associating the phrase with a competing product or business…whether the phrase is too common to be trademarked is up to a court to decide, but I argue that Jessica (and any other business) has an obligation to try and protect its valuable property (including IP) from misappropriation by a competitor. I disagree that her decision shows poor judgment…quite the contrary. It would be poor judgment NOT to take action. I also disagree that the show isn’t a competitor…if, for example (in a real world case), the product “Botox” is a well-known item and some small company creates “Botopical” or “Botex”…or trademarks the phrase “Better than Botox?”, aren’t they piggybacking on Allergan’s product and likely trying to mislead the public into buying their product through some association with Botox? Of course they are.
That being said, of course the general public does not equate Jessica with every resemblace of “hot mom” in the universe, but her BUSINESS is called “the hot mom’s club” and therefore, if she can trademark that phrase and create a public association of it with her business, she should be able to feel comfortable that nobody will benefit from her hard work by “free riding” on the phrase. I also note that from a legal perspective, if a party fails to take action to protect its trademarks, it loses them. It’s as simple as that.
Think about it. What if I started a business and my marketing phrase was, “We bring good things to life.”…or even “We bring great things to life” (varying the GE phrase a bit)…how long do you think it would be before I got a letter from GE’s attorneys? Even if I made a total of ZERO dollars from that business, I guarantee GE would be all over it. They protect their property…the public’s association with their catchphrase to their company.
Jessica’s decision was the right one. You have a philosophical problem with her business (evidenced by your comments about narcissism, etc.), but make no mistake–it’s a business, and her trademarks are valuable and worth every effort to protect. Perhaps, with enough hard work, the general public WILL equate Jessica with eery resemblance of “hot mom” in the universe…after all, that’s the whole point of having a trademark or business or brand, isn’t it?
9. Jessica said:
December 17, 2006 @ 11:08 am
Jack, I know what intellectual property is. I just don’t think the “Hottest Mom in America” has violated any, but we’ll leave that to the courts, nor do I think she will be able to trademark the phrase “hot moms”, but we shall see…
Good Lord, kool-aid anyone? I didn’t realize there were so many Denay worshippers out there. You would think she staved off hunger in third world countries instead of creating “hot moms club”. LOL.
Honestly, ya all, I’m sure she’s a great person, but I don’t think that there are very many people who even know who she is and I’m sure I’m not hurting her rep any, but it’s nice of her family and friends to try to squelch any scrutiny because a successful company/person should be exempt from that sort of thing.
10. Jack said:
December 17, 2006 @ 11:54 am
Nice defensive posture and comment at the end of your post…very revealing (drinking the kool-aid…and “because a successful company/person should be exempt from that sort of thing”)…if you’re going to stand up and “scrutinize” someone, then you need to be ready to BE scrutinized (or at least have your views scrutinized) by people that are much more informed.
For the record, it’s not that Jessica (or anyone else) should be “exempt”…it’s that people should know what they’re talking about before opening their mouths. Think it over…