The Makeover Show: Post-Feminism, Surveillance and Constant Discipline

After today’s presentations, specifically the makeover reality presentation, I really started to think about the makeover paradigm is so engrained in today’s society. “Women’s relationships with their bodies have always been problematic because of the idealized body types represented in the media…A woman’s body does not exist independently of hegemonic discourses related to beauty; It is instead a site on which such discourses are played out in such venues as a reality makeover television program” cites Gallager and Pecot-Hebert in their article “You Need a Makeover!: The Social Construction of Female Body Image in ‘A Makeover Story’, What Not to Wear and Extreme Makeover.” (77). Reading this article and listening to the group presentation only made it clear to me how post-feminist these types of shows and the makeover issue is.

Post-feminism often focuses on empowerment, an empowerment that focuses on this idea that in a post-feminist environment, it’s okay to be a working woman who also enjoys wearing certain clothes or looking a certain way. It is a kind of citizenship that both challenges traditional feminine stereotypes and celebrates consumption habits that often celebrates those very same stereotypes. For example, take a look at a Beyoncé video that has an empowering theme to it. It challenges these stereotypes of being looked at but at the same time she dresses and expresses herself as a sexual object. This particular topic reminded me of the Rosalind Gil article that we read earlier in the semester in which she talked about femininity as a bodily property. In this post-feminist landscape there is this obsessive preoccupation with the body in which the body is regarded as a property. Important to post-feminism and the makeover show is this idea of self-surveillance and discipline.

Critical to this era of feminism that paved the way for these makeover shows is this emphasis on monitoring and surveying the self. Our culture is always looking for ways to transform oneself, which is essentially the premise of these makeover shows. I think what these shows create is the question of “why aren’t you taking care of yourself? You should be doing better and living up to society’s version of beauty. Since you aren’t though, we can take care of it for you and build you a new face!” What shocks me the most isn’t the plastic surgery as seen on The Swan but how scrutinized women are in today’s society, something not really seen with men in our society. My question ultimately lies in the repercussions of this surveillance to young women. Will this lead to years of dieting, plastic surgery and constant monitoring?

Postfeminist Princess Paradise

I think our class came of age at an interesting time, Disney-wise. We got all those second generation Disney Princess movies without the Disney Princess "line" rolled out in front of us everywhere we went. While the merchandise certainly existed, I guess it wasn't as ... branded as it is now? (Technically, are Mulan and Pocahontas really part of the line? I feel like we don't usually see them, which is probably less of a race issue than the fact that they don't ever wear fancy princess dresses. Actually though that just made me think of the last time I went to Disneyland ...I saw this group of girls together, and each one had a T-shirt with a different Disney princess on it that said "you can't sit with us!")

Anyway.

Growing up the classics available on tape as well as the new films being released, I think we were given the option showcased by the advertisement shown in class: you get to choose what type of princess you want to be. Are you a soldier, like Mulan? Are you an explorer, like Ariel? Do you find more fulfillment in a homey space, like Snow White? Are you sporty, like Merida? etc, etc. As a kid I didn't watch Snow White and think "OH BUT SHE'S SO OPPRESSED." Mostly I thought "what an incredibly annoying singing voice." I've read some of what Mr. Giroux's written on Disney, and I have to say I disagreed with a lot with it. (Justified partly, I felt, by some simple factual inaccuracies.)

While I can appreciate the discussions and thoughts that this sort of inquiry presents, I did feel a little skeptical of the slide that said "what messages are children REALLY learning?", with the pictures of the princesses and snarky captions that were found to describe their stories. I have to say I really strongly feel mostly, those are not the messages children learn from these films. These are messages thought up by snarky students.

Excuse me while I geek out a bit:

-Snow White: She is the only one of the classic princesses who faces an overt sexist (Grumpy). How does she win him over? Kills him with kindness.

-Cinderella: I don't think there's anything wrong with a heroine who hopes. Her qualities may be traditionally feminine (kind, patient, gets along with animals?, generally demure and non-argumentative), but I do find the historical context of the film interesting. It was in development directly after WWII, when women were being encouraged to go back to the domestic sphere. Here is our heroine, forced into domestic labor and trying to be as cheerful about it as she can. When the opportunity presents itself for her to stand up for her rights, she does. She is dignified. Her goal isn't to get married or find a prince, per se. It's just to get out.
(Ella Enchanted is of course a beloved take on the Cinderella story, and the change it puts into place is that the title character has been cursed from birth with an inability to defy direct orders. That's why she withstands the abuse. Ever After makes her a bit more physically hardcore, I guess. But actually Cinderella III - which I have seen and have no shame admitting it - gives Cinderella a bit more to do without drastically changing her original personality. It's a pretty fun movie.)

-Sleeping Beauty: Granted, Aurora is not a particularly well-developed or inspirational princess. But as far as the narrative-being-progressive goes, I think it kind of fits. The prince literally does nothing except kiss her. That is his only contribution to her rescue. The three good fairies do everything else for him. FEMALE POWER. (Seriously, though, I know they're not marketed and that's kind of the point of the presentation, but I think it's kind of cool that the movie's protagonists are middle-aged/older ladies.)

-The Little Mermaid: I understand the "but she gave up her voice for legs, HELLO" argument, but I'd like to take it a bit further by adding that it's the villain of the piece who encourages her to do this. Yeah, Eric is the impetus for Ariel becoming human, but I think the movie builds up a solid enough reason for her to want to go to shore anyway- she loves this culture. And when she gets above ground, you see her exploring and having fun. She is active and interactive. She gets her voice back (which incidentally, is what the Prince fell in love with at the start).

I won't go into the rest, except to say that I was a bit disappointed when Pixar released "Brave," and I realized that their default for their first-ever female-led story was about a princess who didn't want to be a princess. What always set them apart from Disney was their diverse types of stories and characters and atmospheres. I really do think the movie's a bit of a mess, but the mother/daughter message was a nice surprise.

Frozen is amazing. I think my favorite thing about it is that the princesses' gender is never a big deal. It's a good message for girls to hear that even though Belle ("It's not right for a woman to read!") and Mulan ("She is a woman! She will never be worth anything!") and Merida ("A princess doesn't [x,y,z]) were told to act/behave a certain way because of their genders, they defied those stereotypes and were able to succeed. But I like that in Frozen, there's no "look what she did in spite of her femaleness!" They are allowed to just exist as characters. No soapbox. It kind of reminded me of a Sarah Silverman quote going around: "Stop telling girls that they can be anything they want when they grow up. I think it's a mistake, not because they can't, but because it would've never occurred to them that they couldn't." Let's try to move past that.

tl;dr: Disney is subjective, and that can make studying it difficult. Personal favorite of their feminist icons: Miss Bianca, from The Rescuers. I think Zooey Deschanel would approve.

The Way Women Dress & Positions of Power

After today's presentations, especially the one referring to women in pop culture who are/aren't feminists I really started to think about how the way women dress seems to affect how people view them from a feminist standpoint. Should we think that Beyonce can't possibly be a feminist since she wears revealing clothes sometimes? Does exploiting a gender norm (in this case the norm of how women dress) mean that a woman is using it to empower herself or simply comply with what society expects? Something that really stood out to me was when I watched Frozen this weekend and the character or Elsa turned more"feminine" once she was crowned Queen and gained a position of power. Her dress was more sparkly and beautiful and instead of wearing flat shoes she now wore heels. Elsa's body was also much more curvy and visible in the dress. So was Disney trying to give the message that her way of dress empowers her, that she is exploiting the gender norm to show that you can be a powerful woman AND wear heels? Or did Disney simply respond to the fact that the position of power means that she has more expectations on her as a woman and that more eyes are on her - so she should fulfill those expectations.  Or did Disney even think her way of dress through, I mean, who wears little heels in the snow? Without a doubt there is much scrutiny given to women in positions of power and how they dress. Just look at Hillary Clinton...infamous for her pantsuits and receiving much criticism over them. Would she be scrutinized equally if she wore more high heels and pencil skirts and dresses? Does showing more of your body equal power?  It seems that society is most comfortable when women in positions of power stick to gender norms.

Halloween: Scary for the wrong reasons

I know this post is belated, though I would like to vent for a second about how much I hate halloween.
Halloween is scary, but for the completely wrong reasons. It isn't scary because people dress as ghosts and zombies, but because people - especially young girls - lose sight of their independent womanhood to dress as provocatively as possible just for this night. Go into any halloween store and try to find a costume for girls that was made to scare people, rather than to impress male audiences. You can't. Halloween has historically not been like this, so why now - in a soceity with much more progressive feminist ideals than in the past - do girls think it is okay to dress in ways that say "my body is an object and I am using this night as an excuse to impress you with my assets". The media certianly doesnt help; many movies make fun of those who dress scarily on Halloween. This image, from Mean Girls, is exactly what I am talking about. Why is it okay for the media to represent halloween as a time for girls to dress like bunnies and sexy policewomen, totally destroying the advancements in feminism that we have made, whilst simultaneously criticizing those who dress as they are supposed to on this scary holiday?

The Burden of Feminism

I went to an all-girls, rather authoritarian and extremely academically challenging high-school. The teachers expected a lot from their students and there was little room for creativity or self-expression. The bar of what defined "success" was high, but rather limited. All of us girls, as well-educated females, felt and still feel this enormous pressure to go on to careers that are prestigious and challenging. Most of my friends are currently studying law, medicine, engineering or actuarial sciences. While this ambition is great, I have seen friends not follow their dreams because the career path they really want to follow is seen as a disappointment for an educated woman.

My closest friend in South Africa is an incredible smart woman who has such a passion for baking and cooking. I know that she would love nothing more than to open a bakery, or even just sell goods from home. However, she told me that she feels as though she cannot pursue this; that it would be embarrassing for her. She was embarrassed about taking Home Economics in high-school as she thought that it was a red flag that indicated that she was not an intelligent person. In her mind and as a response from the pressures to succeed, her love for cooking was seen as a cop out. It was not impressive and indicated that she was nothing more than a simple woman. As a result, she is currently studying Law and is rather miserable.

I too feel this pressure to become something successful or influential. I do not yet know what I want to be or do, but out of all the possibilities I already feel the selection of choices I am giving myself narrowed to generally more masculine or impressive jobs, such as being a CEO or an investment banker.

My ideal of feminism is one where women have freedom of choice without stigma. This extends both ways, with women being allowed to accept retrograde ideals and careers if it is not a result of oppression or gender stereotyping but rather passion and freedom.

The question that I end with is, is it the responsibility of educated women today to take on roles and careers that are influential and progressive?

Pop Culture Overcriticism: Make it Stop, Please

A recent article has posed a question I would have loved to address in class during my group's teaching project on pop music and feminism had I encountered it sooner. It's a question that expresses my feelings toward a great deal of gendered discussion on popular culture in both class discussion and across the blogosphere as of late.

In a piece entitled "From Miley Cyrus To Lily Allen, Why Feminist Culture Critiques Can Turn Women Against Each Other," writer Alyssa Rosenberg asks: "Is there no circumstance in which women can turn their sexuality into powerful art, or in which we can grant women agency in deciding to commodify their sexuality because they believe the payoff is worthwhile?"

Both Miley Cyrus' recent antics (most notably, at the VMAs) and Lily Allen's "feminist" video for new single "Hard Out Here" have been denounced for similar reasons. In criticisms boiled down countless times over, the verdict is in: the ex-Disney star has no place exploiting her own body in the name of album sales. And even worse, Lily Allen has no place preaching against the ways of Miley and her followers - after all, she's just as guilty of using grotesque representations of the female body to get her points across.

When all is said and done, however, I can't help but feel that many of the popular (and pretty redundant) arguments made regarding these two performances could be more damaging to women's interests than the performances themselves. Frankly, I'm refreshed that Rosenberg has suggested that hey - perhaps as a woman, it may not feel right to accept the way Cyrus and Allen have chosen to define their identities. There's a lot exposed and wagging - tongues, twerking asses, the whole bit. But could it be just as much of a pro-female statement to think that perhaps that there is no correct or incorrect way to express oneself artistically?

Many of us in CTCS 412 are women on our way to rewarding careers in the entertainment industry. With that in mind, Rosenberg makes a valid point: "It’s an old move to offer up a definition of virtue that you happen to fit and that your rivals don’t. But for women in the entertainment industry, that’s a strategy that limits their opportunities to evolve, and to open up new paths to meaningful work." I know that one chick's idea of empowering herself may look different (and perhaps even raunchy) to another chick. As someone who would like to work in a creative position in the future, I hope to be surrounded by industry professionals who would agree with a similar notion. Women are complex creatures that are able to express themselves in ways unattainable to men. And yes, in some cases, self-expression may involve overt displays of sexuality. But all in all, that's what makes the experience of being a woman an awesome thing. As Rosenberg puts it, paying homage to Mean Girls, there's been some girl-on-girl crime here. It has to stop!

The link to the article is below. If you have a moment, please let me know what you think.

http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2013/11/14/2942681/lily-allen-jennifer-lawrence-feminist-culture-critiques-turn-women/

In addition to 30 rock reading

In addition to the article about 30 rock that Sasha posted for our group presentation, please check out Lena Dunham interviewing Mindy Kaling that i've posted below.

http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/lena-dunham-hilariously-candidly-interviews-mindy-kaling-20131111

It speaks to the challenges of being a female in a male dominated industry and shows Lena and Mindy's personality and creativity and is very entertaining.

Thanks!