Going back to the ever troubling issue of irony, "lad magazines" and "lad culture" online seem to be a big joke. Literally, the purpose of these media sources is for the cultivation and sharing of 'funny' material by men all under the quirky title of LAD. The problem with this is that the material is so hard to critique without being accused of being too serious, or not getting the joke. However, as we discussed in previous classes, just because a misogynist view is swathed in humor doesn't mean that the author doesn't perpetuate those same views genuinely. On the other hand, Gill describes the theme of laddism to be against the 'new man', to show honesty instead the apparent duplicity of the new man image. So is lad honest? Or is it a joke? Is it honesty masked as a joke?
I think it is wonderful that men's magazines are being produced, but why do they have to emphasis lad culture? Is the masculine, heterosexual male consumer so skittish of homosexual undertones that magazine for men need to resort to crass humor in order to make connections with an audience? Can we blame social roles? In fact, laddist magazines and media can be categorized as a backlash of feminist movements because the whole basis of the work is "a place where men are free to be the men they are without making mistakes", or in another sense, making a 'safe' environment where they can be as pre-feminist as possible without the repercussions of being called anti-feminist.
No comments:
Post a Comment