1. They have unrealistic ideas about the normal human body. These women's magazines show many models wearing a dress size that is a zero or a double zero. The average woman in the United States weights about 166.2 pounds. These ridiculous photos of overly skinny women isn't what young girls learning about their bodies should be looking at. (Note: I am not putting down naturally skinny women; I think all sizes and shapes should be praised. My problem is with models who diet so heavily that they weigh 90 pounds and are 5'10- 6'0 in height.) Another problem was when Cosmopolitan put out this photo of a normal looking model, claiming she was plus size. In today's modeling culture, the model would be considered heavy, although I think that's crazy. I think that normal body types should have a rise in the modeling agency, similar to Dove's campaign for Real Beauty. With young girls reading these magazines, it's hard for them not to think if something is wrong with their body. According to the National Association of Anorexia Nervosa and Associated Disorders, nearly 70 percent of young girls in grades five through twelve said magazine images influence their ideals of a perfect body. About 40 percent of first to third grade girls want to be thinner! It's studies like these that really shine the light onto media's control over young women.
 |
| On the left, a "pluse size" model is advertising a swimsuit. On the right, a "normal size" model is posing for photographs. |
2. These fashion magazines try to relate to real women, yet they fall short of the representation of the population. Real working class women normally have college loans, credit card bills, mortgages and car payments to pay off. They do not have time nor money to buy Salvatore Ferragamo heels for $1,150. (If you can afford these, I envy you!) The editors of Cosmopolitan, Elle, Glamour, and Marie Claire set up their pages of the magazine to be about clothes, hair, beauty and advice on decluttering and destressing your life. I enjoy being up to date on the new fashion trends, but I don't always want to read about the new clothes that are way out of my college student budget. I also have a problem with magazines glamorizing domestic violence such as these ads:
 |
| A 2006 Jimmy Choo advertisement, showing a women in the trunk of a car, and a man "digging her grave." |
 |
| From 12 magazine's article "Victim of Beauty," shows the glamorization of domestic violence. |
3. Magazines need "photogenic ladies to slot into pre-written narrative." Jezebel featured an article, "The Real Reason Women's Magazine's Suck," which talks about examples like Cosmopolitan's Confession stories or Glamour's "The Best Sex Secret I've Never Told Anyone." These stories are already thought up from the editors. The process of this goes as follows: an editor will pick a topic (from example in the article) how a certain Bad Disease changed a woman's life. These editors want stories about how a woman's "distant marriage was made closer" by the Bad Disease, or the woman "embraced alternative treatments, but not too much, so she didn't seem like a wacko." These story lines are made up, invented, and the journalists have to go out to interview real women, who have something similar to say. A journalist commented on this process: "I am asked to provide photos. If the woman has an undesirable quality- like, say, she's a lesbian- she's disqualified." These stories are harmful because of the fictional tales. These stories skew the real life stories
of very real women because they are made up.
4. Cosmopolitan's claim to be "for women by women" is false. This claim bothers me because it should really be "by men for women." The articles topics included in Cosmopolitan are for a man's entertainment: articles about how to please a man during sex, what to wear so you can get him to like you, and cookie-cutter portrayals on sexuality. Women's magazines contribute to the idea that men expect and prefer thin women. As an example of ideas for a man's entertainment, Cosmopolitan featured an article called "7 Cool Tricks You Need Now." It seems like the article will be about tips for women to make them feel good about themselves, and not for women to do for others. The article goes on to say that these tricks will make you feel good about showing them off- going back to the entertainment argument where you are showing off something to entertain another. Another Cosmopolitan article, "Fun Little Tricks Guys Love," told women to use thong underwear to tie their hair back. What?!
Some people have critiqued the magazine industry in satires like Overanalyzing Magazine and in a mock magazine cover campaign aired during International Women's Day.
Another campaign, held by the National Eating Disorder Information Center, asked women what they thought about women's magazines. The women could "shed their weight problem" in the box provided. I feel like this advertisement shows a very bold statement, and hopefully creates more discussion on the mainstream media's control on women's magazines.
You made some very good points, so I'll just base my comments upon your numbering system:
ReplyDelete1. The modeling world is quite obsessed with a skinny body frame. Like you said, there is nothing wrong with having a fast metabolism and being naturally skinny, as long as it is in fact, natural. Several years ago, I read an article written by an ex-model, who had retired from the modeling industry. In her account, she explained that designers choose skinny models to walk down the runways in their clothing, and paralleled that to how clothes hang on a hanger. In her words, she said that the goal of the catwalk is to have the viewer's attention solely on the clothes. When I thought about it, that made some sense to me. If the designers only use skinny women to highlight their clothes, then regular women feel that they need to be skinny as well, because those women are models. I feel that this generates a cycle: Designers need skinny models to sell clothes--women see the models and envy them, which can then lead to damaging body altering.
Just to clarify, I am not critiquing women who are naturally thin, just the media's obsession with being skinny, and how that can affect women.
2. I find it hypocritical that Jimmy Choo would advertise women as being the "victims of beauty". They assuredly use models that perpetuate this unrealistic beauty standard. Additionally, their merchandise is ridiculously expensive! Looking at their online shopping catalog, there are shoes that range from several hundred dollars to several THOUSAND dollars. First of all, the average women cannot afford these shoes! All this advertisement does is perpetuate a feeling of envy, self-loathing, and an unhappiness with their life. In this way, I believe that Jimmy Choo is advocating the idea of being "victims of beauty", not critiquing it.
4. It is truly incredible that these magazines are supposed to be "empowering" to women, when like you said, they are mostly aimed towards pleasing men. I've always felt that if you want to make changes in yourself, you should do it for the right reasons, not so you can keep a man for a little longer.
I like your points about how fashion magazines try to relate to real women but use ads for designer clothes like Prada, Marc Jacobs or Burberry. This is sooooo prominent in Teen Vogue that I actually avoid reading the magazines when I get them (I got a free subscription for buying something from Forever 21). And the worst part is that at the very end they try to feature a story about a real, relatable girl's fashion style but it's always an actor's kid or designer's daughter who of course can afford Lacoste socks.
ReplyDeleteAlso your mention of Cosmo actually being "by men for women" is something i've noticed as well. If you really look, they quote and poll so many men for their articles that it makes absolutely no sense that they try to claim it as "for women by women." And as for tying your hair back with a thong?! I bet most men would think that is weird anyway!