Magazines and Identity

Gill's chapter begins with an exploration of the multiple ideologies found in women's magazines. In preparation for this class, I went through my room's magazine collection only to find that we have almost every month of Cosmopolitan but no magazines of true "substance". Personally, I can say that I have no distinct reason for purchasing these types of magazines other than out of boredom but after reading Gill's chapter, I began thinking of what I was actually purchasing, in terms of ideology. As Gill mentioned on pg. 182, "magazine publishers sell the friendly and intimate relationship they have established with their readers"--I have most certainly been influenced by this trusting relationship with a magazine and the ideology it presents to me. There are constant suggestions on how to improve appearances, behaviors, how to portray yourself in a certain way, etc. What bothers me, however, is the sneaky tactics taken to convey those messages. I do not think of myself as a naive person or one who relies heavily on the media to control my looks/actions, but as this class has done in the past, my eyes have been opened to the "subliminal" messages of media. The "sympathetic environment" of magazines helps to contour the content and advertisements to create a relationship of trust among readers and publications; we regard the magazines as somewhat of a friend who we can turn to for monthly advice. Additionally, the women's magazines come in multiple feminist discourses so, just as you can choose your friends based on personality integration, one may choose one's magazine based on her particular opinion and her ideas can be justified and "listened to" by the magazine.

The teen magazine section of the chapter presents images to vulnerable teenage girls who are in constant tension with their own bodies and minds. The magazines subtly express how these girls should look and act so that they may "win over" the males who are presented in the magazines. This is problematic for feminism because it places males as the socially superior which, as Gill mentions, is just as bad as the objectification of women in men's magazines. The content "tricks" teenagers into thinking that the changes they should make to their appearances are done so because they are "super fun!" This idea makes me question the integrity of the magazine publishers because it is almost like they are taking their trusting relationships with readers for granted. While I understand that magazines are in the market for profit, I feel that they manipulate readers to the point of almost brainwashing.

The messages of men's and women's magazines are extremely different and Gill's interpretation of each ideology is that the "representations are designed to naturalize gender difference and male power" (217). Because each magazine has such a niche audience, or at least a gendered audience (typically), these representations are accepted. The magazine publishers know their readers and know what they want/do not want to read about and that "insider knowledge" translates into extreme success, whether we like it or not. There will always be an audience who accept the message of male power but it is the messages within the claims of ideology that we must pick up on.

My Time as a Tomboy

So, after reading "Little Butches: Tomboys in Hollywood Film", I got to thinking about my own Tomboy phase which occurred through the second and third grades.

Hatch discusses a few possibilities in which the Tomboy phase was used in film through the 50s and the 70s. It seems to me that Tomboys were mostly used as a means of symbolizing prepubescence and girlhood innocence as well as a face for feminism.

Personally, my phase was a little different. I clearly remember wearing black turtle necks with my short haircut (similar to my style now) and playing cops and robbers with the boys in my class on the jungle gym along side my girlfriends. But the moment that any of the boys paid more attention to one of my girlfriends, I was super duper jealous. This means that my Tomboy phase was simply a means of meeting boys and flirting with them without seeming like I actually like-liked them (cause we all know that was icky).

This made me think further.

My favorite quote from this reading is this: "gender is not a product of clothing and hair style alone but is predicated on a set of behaviors that bolsters a system of male dominance and female submission" (79). Which got me thinking about my Tomboy phase in general. Could the Tomboy phase be a normal, socially constructed part of femininity? It seems like it definitely could be.

Here are my reasons. We discussed gender as a social construct, an act that is performed based on our desire to be normal. Yes, the Tomboy phase, according to Hatch, is a part of growing up for young girls before they understand sexual desire, but that wasn't the case for me or my girlfriends in elementary school. No, we didn't understand what sex was yet but the reason we played cops and robbers with the boys was because we inherently wanted their attention. We had crushes. So for me and my friends, and I understand that it wasn't the case for everyone else, our Tomboy phase was the beginning of our desire.

Does this make the Tomboy phase a necessary part of our performed femininity? Let's Discuss.

Also....I understand my experience in terms of Hatch's theory that the Tomboy phase was simply a phase before young women discover heterosexual desire but I do not understand its connection to masculine domesticity. That is something that I would like to discuss further with the class.

I Don't Want to be a Stupid Girl

I found Butler's points about gender and performance interesting, as well as the fact that people are constantly changing and identity isn't fixed. Although all these points are fairly obvious as you read them, it wasn't until I did read them that I started to critically think about them and how they apply, especially in media. This made me think about how from birth our gender identities are fixed, with baby blankets (blue for boys, pink for girls) to the toys that are supposed to be for girls vs. boys; i.e. Barbies and dolls for girls and toy trucks and action figures for boys. As we continue through high school we become even more separated, from classes that are predominately female (home economics) and predominantly male (wood shop). It isn't until we're older that we become aware of the distinctions that are made.

Helping us along the way of fixed gender identities is the media, from television shows to movies to advertisements, that tell us how to fit into the gender norms of male and female. Disney movies and television shows such as Power Rangers and Thomas the Train help show this separation. Advertisements as well show how men and women are supposed to act, such as with this clip which shows many good examples of advertisements that define gender for men and women.

To fix this Butler calls for a challenge to fixed gender norms by causing "gender trouble," by suggesting "that existing gender forms could [be] undermined through parody" and "she welcomes any alternative performances of identity," using dressing in drag as an example. This made me think of Pink's music video "Stupid Girls," where she pokes fun at girls that go along with the norm with such things as body image, and challenges girls to fight against these norms to become president or play in typical male sports.

Am I Blind? Am I Watching a "Guy's" Show?

Am I blind? After reading the assigned articles I am seriously considering this possibility thinking about how I have missed so many signs in my years of television watching. One of the articles that struck me the most was Poniewozik's article about what shows are directed towards what gender. I have always known there are certain shows that are geared towards specific genders. Examples of this may be What Not to Wear (a makeover show that mainly focuses on women and what they should not wear), The Good Wife (based on the story of a housewife-turned-lawyer who has to prove herself in a male-dominated world -- everyone should watch this because it's awesome), and The Bachelor (a show based on putting twenty five women together going after one guy and finding "true love"). All of these shows mentioned above are what I believe to be geared towards women more so than men. However, maybe more men should be watching these things. Maybe they'd gain a little insight and, in the case of The Bachelor, they'd learn what NOT to do because clearly those relationships just about never work out.

Looking back on the examples given in the article though, a lot of those shows mentioned, such as New Girl, Game of Thrones, and The Playboy Club that are supposedly geared towards attracting male viewers came as surprises to me. I don't know many girls that dislike New Girl and don't want to be like Jess in some way. But then again, I have turned some of my guy friends onto this show, explaining it's not just about a woman. Is that what's supposed to happen? Sometimes I feel like the middle man, having to explain to guys that it's not a "girly" show and they should give it a chance. This happens more often than one would think, and 9 times out of 10, they like it and I get the satisfaction of being right. One of the larger issues here is that it all has to be labeled "for guys" or "for girls". It's evident that television is consumed mainly by women and therefore, it's become the norm to excuse guys for watching certain shows when those shows were actually meant for their viewing all along! I think it's good that women are less criticized for watching "men's" television than a man would be for watching a "woman's" show, but let's be real! People should be allowed to watch whatever they want! I will gladly support a guy that watches a show to gain some insight to what we females are talking about. Or if he likes it? Good for him. And good for the girls that watch sports games by themselves, something often portrayed as "guy time". In conclusion, television shows are said to be geared towards a certain gender but it's clearly not working from the results we have seen from the viewers.

The Four Aspects of Signs- Symbol, Icon, Index and STOP

Gill and van-Zoonen analyze gender in media text with semiology as the study of signs and signification. Semotics originated in studies of language. Gill states that, “It is both a theory and a method, and works by unpacking and making explicit meanings that we all – as lay semiotics – create through our engagement,” (45). As semiology is the science a signs it is important to understand what such signs mean. There are obvious and subliminal signs throughout media texts, music, flags and fashion. Such signs are arbitrary and certainly issue feminists see that needs to be covered by a red stop sign. Because such signs vary from ionic, indexical and symbolic codes get messaged. Due to the fact that encoding is such a great component to our culture it is important that such sign are decoded correctly and honestly analyzed as best as possible. Within advertisement we see constant signs constructed by myths. In advertising we can distinguish who was such advertisement intended for and how does the advertiser send the message successfully in such a short span of time. We see the meanings of such signs by the presentation of the ad.

In this Super bowl ad for Teleflora we this dark haired, thin, ethic women being completely hyper sexualized. As there are hints to this ad targeting men, in heterosexual couples, to purchase flowers. We know that this ad is for men not only because she is seen as a sex object but also she hints that the man should give his girlfriend flowers but there also hinting at the fact that he should also give her sexual pleasures. In another ad we see women discussing their participation in objectifying another woman by simply using her piece of paper to paint on her body. The women who are painting state their tactic as a way to draw attention to the ad with a woman’s body.  The only sign that I saw while watching these ads was STOP. That is exactly why while watch these commercials I spoke to my friends accompanying me about the objectification and the meaning to such signs.

Nothing But An Escape

Romance novels have never been my idea of "good literature." Even though I have very limited experiences with romantic novels, I have always thought them to be a little too superficial and unrealistic. To me, romance novels seemed to simply be an extension of society's flawed notion of romance and the relationships between men and women. I just didn't see the point of reading romance novels. Janice Radway's piece definitely gave me a slightly different perspective on the issue of romance novels and media consumption in general.

Before reading this piece, I had never even considered the idea of using romance novels as a form of escape from the realities of life. It had never occurred to me that the seemingly cliché characters and predictable story lines could actually serve as a way in which to immerse one’s self in an idealized fantasy world. Radway’s study of Dot’s clientele was very interesting to me because it gave the female readers of romance novels a chance to express themselves and to explain their love (or obsession?) with these novels. Although I do not plan to go out and start reading as many romance novels as I can get my hands on, I did begin to identify with the women on their use of this media as an escape from real life. For instance, I am an avid viewer of MTV’s Jersey Shore. As a fairly educated young woman, I am fully aware that the show’s portrayal of women isn’t the most favorable. However, I watch it because it provides a break from the stresses of college life. Once a week, I can watch other people party it up and momentarily forget about the giant assignment I have to finish.

The chapter in Gill concerning audience consumption was also very striking to me in the manner in which it analyzes different kinds of media consumption studies from different points of view. I was struck by the fact that things like differences in location could have such a profound effect in the consumption of media and the manner in which it is interpreted. As a very large consumer of media (especially electronic media), I was pleased to see that research was being conducted from the point of view of the audience; as opposed to the research done by academics without any consideration of the average audience.

Testing 1, 2, 3...

My main focus in searching for classes for my final semester here at Denison, to be completely honest, was first an acceptable time slot and secondly an interesting subject matter. Having completed my major requirements, my options were pretty open. After spending a semester in Business of Media with Professor Copple Smith, I had come to enjoy her teaching style and the laid back atmosphere of the class that was always coupled with interesting discussion and debate.

When it came to the subject of gender, my only collegiate experience was through a gender communication class with Dr. Gunn. I was incredibly hesitant heading into that course, but came out with fresh perspectives and an enlarged sensitivity to certain topics. My only previous experience in understanding gender topics was having my mother lecture me when I yelled at women drivers on the road.

None the less, I look forward to an interesting semester in a topic I know little about. Oddly enough, I find the GE classes I take at Denison where I have little, to no experience, frequently end up being some of the most interesting. While I may only be able to bring a singular perspective to class discussions, I look forward to broadening that scope.

Why I Took This Class

Let's be honest. While I didn't say it in class, the main reason I took this class is for the professor. She was just getting a bit too much love in class so I wanted to keep her humble. I was also interested in the subject after I wrote a paper on Two Broke Girls last semester, and I began to think about how that show along with shows like Whitney where there are lead female characters.

It's interesting to look at the history of gender in the media, and I am excited to see where we have come from. It is important to study it because, as someone who plans to go into the industry, to analyze where we want to take the portrayal of gender in the media. I am excited because at Denison there is never an agenda, so I hope to analyze what has happened in the past as well as what is happening today, in order to make an informed decision about where to go in the future.