Magazines

Our discussion as well as the readings for this week on magazines were quite interesting – and depressing to be quite honest.

It seems like looking at modern-day magazines and comparing them to magazines of the past – especially women’s magazines- shows that the content hasn’t changed much, or the variety for that matter. Apparently women, as they always have been, are obsessed with tricks to get the right man, beauty, clothes, housekeeping, house decorating and shoes. Not that I think it’s wrong for women to have these interests, but I was hopeful that current magazines would have topics with a little more depth and substance.

Also, the ads where 90-95% white, beautiful, young, sex-crazed females that had been Photoshoped to death, giving a little better insight into the ever-growing frequency of teen eating disorders, body-image issues and depression, among numerous others. These are the standards we are setting for our children today?? Pathetic.

The overall theme of every publication came back to materialism. As a society –and I would say women are more guilty of this than men- we don’t feel good about ourselves unless we have things. All kinds of things…jewelry, make-up, clothes, shoes, cars, hair products, MEN, etc. I expected to see these types of themes running throughout the magazines of the 60s, 70s and possibly 80s; but to have it at nearly the same level in 2012 is completely inexcusable for the heads of these companies.

Article Discussion

I found this interesting article in The New York Times that relates to the sexism discussion we’ve been having in class. The article, called “Season of Equal-Opportunity Sexism,” discusses how this year’s newest TV shows are giving men and women the chance to “pick between his and her sexism.” The article references the comedies “2 Broke Girls” on CBS and “Are You There, Chelsea?” on NBC as examples of contemporary TV shows that are emasculating for men and ushering in a new surge of female empowerment.

“Are You There, Chelsea?” is based on Chelsea Handler’s comic persona as a slutty, foul-mouthed drunk – characteristics more heavily stereotyped to men than women. While Handler is not the first woman to build a career on crude, offensive and often demeaning jokes about men, sex and substance abuse, she is one of the most persuasive and committed. To have such female characters in prime time be so committed is an innovative occurrence. The catch here is that many critics say that the show is only on the air because of Handler’s pre-existing celebrity status as a result of her popular talk show on E!, and that if the show was pitched by anyone else it wouldn’t make it on the air. They also say that since people already know Handler’s comedic personality, they expect to see her in such crude – some would say “unrealistic”- female roles.

The article also mentions the latest male insurrection on TV, “Work It” on ABC. The show follows two men who lost their jobs at a car dealership in St. Louis and can find work only by dressing in drag to pass as sexy pharmaceutical sales representatives. However, the author feels that the show’s poor narrative and writing leave much room for improvement, comparing it to sitcoms of the past who did it right like “Bosom Buddies” in the 1980s.

I think this article would be interesting to discuss in classes such as the one we’re taking because it presents a curious idea: Is it only possible for female roles to be popular in the rankings if the characters are taking on male-associated or “masculine” personality traits? I will say, I think it’s a good start to have such innovative and unconventional comedies in primetime TV; but, it still doesn’t seem like a complete victory for women. These new shows just demonstrate how highly we, as a society, hold masculine traits over feminine traits. If a woman can act like a man, she is applauded not because she is strong-willed and brash, but because she’s “just being funny.”

I think it’s empowering for women to see other women of power and influence, such as Chelsea Handler, take on these masculine characteristics for the world to see and never apologize for it. But where females find it empowering, I think males find it more of a silly, unrealistic portrayal of a woman who is just trying to make people laugh. Men assume women don’t or wouldn’t act like that in real life. That might be true for some women because society has molded them to believe we won’t be accepted if we act overtly masculine. But perhaps these new shows will start to open the door a little wider for females. Maybe these shows show a slow but steady progression forward to a time when the lines are more blurred between sex and gender.

The 50s Housewives

I really enjoyed our last class meeting because it was surprisingly informative. Usually when I hear I will be watching documentaries and films during a class I think 'Great, now I'll have to try a stay awake through this.' However, I was pleasantly surprised at how interesting the documentary and movie were and how well they held my attention.

Getting a better understanding of a 50s housewife from the History Channel documentary really helped to lay the framework for the film, "Mona Lisa's Smile." I had never seen the film before we watched it in class, and now that I have, I am surprised I never did before now. Besides the outstanding cast of actors, (Julia Roberts, Julia Stiles, Kirsten Dunst, Maggie Gyllenhaal, ect.) I felt like it was simply a movie every woman should see. The thought of some of the most brilliant female minds in this country choosing to be a housewife instead of pursuing their career goals of being lawyers and doctors would seem ludicrous today - or would it?

Being from a small town, I've grown up seeing similar choices from women older than me as well as from my female peers. Instead of college, they become housewives and take care of the babies while their husbands are at work. Now, I want to make clear right now that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. If being a housewife and a mother is what makes a woman happy and fulfilled, than I truly think that's what she should be doing. At the same turn, it makes one stop and think about how far women have really come in the last 60 years. I mean, I would expect that in 60 years women would be at least making the same amount of money that men do for doing the same jobs...but the stats would say otherwise. And, the top jobs for women in the 50s compared to 2012 sadly haven't changed much. They are the stereotypical "woman" jobs such as nurses, teachers, secretaries, ect. Don't get me wrong, we have come a long way, but facts are facts people...to say that women are offered all the same career opportunities and positions as a men would be, excuse me for being frank but, idiotic.

It simply seems that society and our culture keep most women from fulfilling their career ambitions once they are married, because at that point they are no longer independent-thinkers in terms of their careers. They are expected to put everyone's happiness before their own, attend PTA meetings, clean everyone's clothes and have dinner on the table by 6. Who would have room for a career? Being a housewife or a stay-at-home mom is a full-time job (and one that doesn't pay at that). And that is why someone has to do it. But while these roles are expected of women, their male counterparts can get married, even have kids and simply continue working everyday toward their next big promotion without getting any slack from anyone about being a "bad parent" or "neglecting the housework" or "not picking the kids up from school and driving them to soccer practice."

I don't think of myself as a feminist (although the definition of that is different according to who you're talking to), but as a woman who cares about the double standard that still exists in society. And if you don't think there is one anymore, simply do the research. Or consider how many female CEOs of major corporations there are compared to male ones...it's not many.

I'll put it this way: I know most women (and men for that matter) want to get married and have a family, and I agree that there could be nothing better in this life than that. I want those things too eventually. But our whole lives while we're growing up and going to school we are told we can do anything we set our minds to and if we work hard enough we can accomplish our biggest goals. Is it fair that girls are taught to think that until they get married and then be expected to give up on every endeavor they've worked their whole lives for just because society "says so?" Meanwhile, men can go on and keep pursuing their dreams. In many ways marriage is looked at as a boost for men in the workplace because they then seem more stable and reliable.

My advice to women: If you have any little inclination to accomplish something in your professional life - do it. Some of you will be able to do it while you are happily married and taking care of a family (the rest of us will call you Superwomen), but everyone else may have to take some time to grow up past the age of 25 before getting married -imagine that- in order to establish yourself in a job you truly want.

You can do it!