Like in Neuborne's article, men and women alike have been "programmed" to think that women can't be sexy and smart, or beautiful and athletic, or gorgeous and opinionated. This programming has made way for raunch cultural phenomena such as Girls Gone Wild and Playboy -- multi-million dollar corporations that profit at the expense of the dignity of women. The inherent problem is not that these corporations exist, but that women play directly into their hands -- they want to be seen as "sexy" or "beautiful" so they try to get featured, or at the very least, they try to emulate what they see in the media. The only plausible way to reverse this trend is to try and deprogram the old way of thinking, and "reprogram" society and make men and women realize that women do not have to fit one single type of beauty; a woman can be a multitude of things and have many different abilities and talents, and at the end of the day still be seen as beautiful -- such qualities are not mutually exclusive; instead, as Levy states, we should se them as "mutually inclusive" so that characteristics like athleticism are no longer seen at odds with beings sexy. If we change the way we think, we can change the way women are portrayed in everyday life.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Female Chauvinist Pigs: Reprogramming Society
It was very interesting reading the first chapter of Female Chauvinist Pigs from a female athlete's point of view. Levy states, "If you really believed you were both sexy and athletic, wouldn't it be enough to play your sport with your flawless body and your face gripped with passion in front of the eyes of the world" (44). Rather than embracing their talents and athletic capabilities that most human beings don't have, Levy points out that these Olympic athletes have sacrificed their hard work on the court so they are not accepted based on the merits of their athletic performance, rather their appearance in magazines like "Playboy," in order to play into the generally accepted definitions of "sexy" or "beautiful" that society has decided upon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Levy’s “Raunch Culture” highlights the programming Neuborne focused on in her article. Like Lisa stated, this programming of both women and men poses a problem in our society today. Instead of embracing a woman’s natural beauty, it seems that it is constantly reinforced into young women’s minds that in order for men to consider them “sexy” and attractive, they must emulate the women they see in Playboy and Girls Gone Wild.
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting to read Hefner’s interview with Levy, as Hefner remarked, “The only alternative to enjoying Playboy, or flashing for Girls Gone Wild, or getting implants or reading Jenna Jameson’s memoir, is being uncomfortable with and embarrassed about your sexuality.” Hefner’s interview is similar to Sittenfield’s article when she writes, “The world has given you two options: You can be a slut or a matron.” (p.7) I find it interesting that some people consider “being comfortable with your sexuality and body” (posing nude) to be similar to the feminist movements of the seventies. If anything, the actions some women partake in today are a far cry from what the early feminists were fighting for. While some may argue that magazines such as Playboy express the liberating notions of being a woman, the fact that there are still societal pressures to act and dress a certain way and the fact that Olympians like Amanda Beard are asked to pose in mens’ magazines are indicators that the cause early feminists were fighting for are still in fact prevalent today.
I n an article I found, it highlights the base of the problems Levy touched upon in “Raunch Culture.” The fact that children are being introduced to the Playboy bunny and “internalizing the notions of gender and sexuality” perpetuates the problem.
"The Playboy bunny has become a popular icon not only among adults but its image has become mainstream. Children are now targets and billboards for not only the logo but the underlying conceptual theology on gender and sex. A theology they are too young to understand; yet, have already adopted and internalized before they have had a chance to experience alternative perceptions on sex and sexuality. How did this pervasive bunny breed so fast? The media and advertisement has shaped and changed the perception of its unacceptable character into an acceptable one. Advertisement has become the PR for the sex industry."
Read more at Suite101: Playboy Bunny and Children: Sex Icon now a Kid's Toy http://feminism.suite101.com/article.cfm/playboy_bunny_and_children#ixzz0dDB1esxehttp://feminism.suite101.com/article.cfm/playboy_bunny_and_children
I agree with Lisa's comment about the programming of women and how in today's society we are programmed to believe that women have achieved this sense of empowerment and have overcome their suppression by willingly engaging in sensual activities including stripping and pornography. Furthermore, women who seem uncomfortable or unwilling to participate in this cultural phenomena are now criticized for their rejection. However the idea that women are somehow empowered by this acceptance and willingness to show off their "sexiness" does not change the fact that it objectifies women and turns them into commodities. Thus the empowerment of women should not be based on the public display of their "sexiness" or "hotness", but rather the same qualities that seem to empower men, which definitely does not include their willingness to reveal more skin. In reference to the Olympic athletes and Katie Couric, all women who have specialized talents and who have acquired respectable reputations and should be empowered by these factors alone. However these women still feel the need to publicly display their "sexy" and "hot" appearances. Although these women can argue that they were simply embracing their "sexiness" alongside their success, posing in Playboy Magazine or showing off more skin have much stronger sexual implications aimed towards male gratification. Thus, instead of finding a sense of empowerment through the acceptance of this "ranch culture", women should rather reject this objectification and empower themselves through the same means in which men do.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Lisa's blog about how a woman should have the right to be multi-dimensional and that she should be satisfied with whatever talents/gifts she has been given, rather than feel inadequate enough to resort to posing in playboy. A also agree that programming needs to be altered and we the women have to change what we think in order for women to be portrayed differently in everyday life. In the readings it was revealed that this "Raunch Culture", perhaps created to satisfy man now serves as a tool for women to express themselves and have fun. This perhaps may have started with men, but has developed to a point where this sort of female behavior is still in place because of women pushing it to still remain there.
ReplyDeleteThe examples of women pushing and marketing each other is constant throughout the chapter. Mia Leist, the tour manager of GGW declares that what she does "Is a business, In a perfect world, maybe we'd stop and change things. But we know the formula. We know how it works" but when asked if she would appear on GGW, firmly claims "Definately not" . The fact that Playboys CEO and other important positions are held by women enforces the discussions we have had in class about how certain programmed roles are made by women. These women of power, as well as scantily clad singers/actors fuel the women of today into believing that baring all is an act for themselves, to liberate and show the power of a woman. By doing this, they create one dimensional views of what is "sexy". Perhaps this is why the Olympic Athletes, as well as Katie Couric felt the need to pose, despite being successful and talented. That lack of satisfaction according to Ariel Levy, was created unknowingly by the early feminist revolutions. Simply put, women need to change their thinking in order to alter this single-dimensional view of what is satisfying, sexy, sensual and appropriate.
Nice work on this first round of discussion. I especially appreciate the connection that you've drawn between the concept of programming (Neuborne) and the ideas presented by Levy. Let's definitely talk about that in class today!
ReplyDelete