Something Extra... V Magazine "Who Cares About Age Issue"

I was just looking at the fashion blog Fashiongonerogue.com and came across the three new V Magazine covers, staring Jane Fonda, Susan Sarandon, and Sigourney Weaver. All three of the actresses are over 60 and attempt to prove that age is just a number. However, Jane Fonda just recently admitted to having plastic surgery. Furthermore, it appears that the women are trying to fit into what society has deemed as beautiful in the present. All three women are shown wearing styles that are in vogue and poses that we see displayed by models. Fonda is captured in animal print and a studded choker. Weaver wears a thick knit and dark lipstick and Sarandon is represented in the nude with long curly hair and big earrings. What do you guys think about these images? Do they work?

Putting the penis on a pedestal?

Mel Gibson’s movie What Women Want attempts to get into the female mind. After an electrical accident, Gibson is given access to every woman’s thoughts. Simultaneously, Gibson is objectified by women left and right; scrutinized for his demeanor, his physic, etc. Throughout the film we see that Gibson is uncomfortable with this role reversal. As a result, he becomes more aware of his actions and his encounters with women. However, in the end, our protagonist goes back to being an outsider to the woman’s mind. But it is only during Gibson’s access into the mind of women that female thoughts and desires are exposed. This private or reserved representation of the female underscores traditional assumptions about femininity within our society.

As stated by John Berger, “Men act and women appear”, we see that the gendered body is represented very differently for the male and female (Bordo, 196). In The Male Body: A New Look at Men in Public and in Private, Susan Bordo posits, “Women may dread being surveyed harshly—being seen as too old, too fat, too flat-chested—but men are not supposed to enjoy being surveyed period” (173). She argues that the experience of being surveyed or being placed on display is strictly fastened to femininity. While the female identity relies on this encounter, the male identity is questioned and subjugated through the same process of observation. Furthermore, Bordo explains, “Women aren’t used to seeing naked men frankly portrayed as ‘objects’ of a sexual gaze” (177). The access to such images of the male body, in Bordo’s opinion has been denied to women. She states, “women have been deprived not so much of the sight of beautiful male bodies as the experience of having the male body offered to us, handed to us on a silver platter, the way female bodies—in the ads, in the movies—are handed to men” (178).

To this end, we see that when Gibson is given access to women’s thoughts in What Women Want, in particular their desires, he feels inadequate and overwhelmed with failure. Could this be because he feels out-of-place or overexposed to the female gaze? Bordo elaborates on this idea of “overexposure” quoting John Ashbery of New York magazine who states, “Nude women seem to be in their natural state; men, for some reason merely look undressed” (179). While Bordo strongly disagrees with this statement, it serves as a testament to the unequal roles with which men and women play within society. Additionally, it illustrates society’s lack of experience with the heterosexual males offered up as “sexual objects”. Hence, we do not know how to look or react to the naked male body.

In The Perfectible Body: The Western Ideal of Male Physical Development, Kenneth R. Dutton examines the significance of the body through the perspective of the observer. He posits that “although the nude appears to depict the body as immediately accessible to our scrutiny, free of artifice and accretions— or perhaps because it merely appears to do so—its political and sexual ramifications are constantly open to changing ideological interpretation” (321). Hence the body is continually reinforced into particular positions of power or lack there of.

However, at one point Dutton argues that the objectified body can serve as a criticism of being an outsider. He discusses Robert Mapplethorpe’s pornographic studies, specifically his classicising studies, which use black nudes as an example of being an outsider. In this sense, could we argue that the male nudes serve as a means for the female to share in a sense of being an outsider?

So why are we all so uncomfortable with the male body? Why has it remained such a taboo topic and image to capture? In Hunks, Hotties and Pretty Boys, Susan Baker grapples with the representation of male beauty at the end of the twentieth century. In her examination of the feminist artist Alice Neel’s work, Baker explains, “her perspective on the male body is no-nonsense” (18). Neel is known for her depictions of the male body in its natural or regular form. In one particular artwork, also recognized as one of Neel’s most controversial nudes, she captures Joe Gould, a “homeless would-be writer” of the 1930s in New York (18). In the painting, Gould is represented having not one, but three penises that are placed front and center in the piece, as to not be over looked. Baker explains that this representation serves “to put the organ of controversy right out there before any woman or man willing to consider it and its significance” (18).

Could it be that the lack of discussion or representation of the male body on display perpetuates this mysterious and taboo sensation? Are we putting the penis on a pedestal? And if so, how do we remove it from such a throne?

The statement, “putting the pussy on a pedestal” is continually used to refer to the actions of men. It goes hand in hand with the other lovely saying, “Pussy wiped”. Both of these statements make men run for the hills or have them in constant fear of having their friends say them within the same sentence as their names. Inevitably, these statements are discussing the power reversal within a heterosexual relationship, where the female holds the power while the male simultaneously reverts to the role of the subordinate. At the same time, such statements imply that this type of power reversal is represented as the exception not the norm. In this case, aren’t we continually placing the penis on a pedestal?

In Survival of the Prettiest: The Science of Beauty, Nancy Etcoff contests that penises serve “as charms to lure females” (182). Nevertheless she explains, “In most societies today, women do not get to see the penis immediately, so it value as a courtship device is questionable” (182). In this sense, the lack of display of the penis, in Etcoff’s opinion acts as a means of attracting individuals of the opposite sex. Similarly, when describing a male Calvin Klein advertisement (seen on 169), Bordo exclaims, “clearly outlined through the soft jersey fabric of the briefs… there’s a substantial presence there that’s palpable (it looks so touchable, you want to cup your hand over it)” (171). In both of these passages there is an apparent enthroning of the penis. It is covered and left a mystery to its observers. However Etcoff speculates that this covering of the penis may be due to that fact that the male organs are not deemed as beautiful. Could it be that the size of the penis is what is desirable and not its actual appearance?

Furthermore, Etcoff emphasizes that size serves as the determining factor within hierarchy of power, or as she calls it the “tower of power”. She explains, “In the animal world, the dominant animal tends to be the largest” (172). Moreover, “In human villages throughout the world, the chief is know as ‘the big man’, and he is usually physically imposing” (172-173). While Etcoff is only discussing a male hierarchy revolved around size and proportions, it could be argued that this way of thinking has been applied to our ways of seeing and understanding both the male and female bodies. In this sense, could it be that the male body is continually placed on a pedestal because of its size?

In questions of the penis it is always safe to refer to Sigmund Freud for some sort of explanation. In Some Psychical Consequences of the Anatomical Distinction between the Sexes, Freud grapples with the development in both the female and male sexes. It is in his opinion that when the female encounters the penis for the first time during childhood, she notices the “strikingly visible and of large proportions, at once recognize it as the superior counterpart of their own small and inconspicuous organ, and from that time forward fall a victim to envy for the penis” (252). While Freud’s theory goes overboard on the sexist remarks, his underlying ideas could still serve some purpose.

Overall, Freud argues that through the process of comparison, more specifically a comparison based on “proportions”, children attempt to understand themselves in relation to those around them, more specifically in relation to those of the opposite sex. In regards to the female, Freud posits that the result is that of penis envy, a “character-trait of jealousy” (254). This jealousy, Freud believes originates from the difference in size of the sexual organs of the male and female. Could this idea of proportions be the reason for the crowning of the penis? Could it all come down to size? And if this is the case, how do we start to move in a new direction where size doesn’t have to matter? Hopefully something will change so men like Mel don’t have to experience some outer body experience to understand what women want.

Works Cited:

Baker, Susan. "Naked Boys, Desiring Women: Male Beauty in Modern Art and Photography." Hunks, Hotties, and Pretty Boys. Ed. Stevn Davis and Maglina Lubovich. 12-48. Print.

Bordo, Susan R. "Beauty (Re)discovers the Male Body." The Male Body a New Look at Men in Public and in Private. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2000. 168-225. Print.

Dutton, Kenneth R. "The Body Observed." The Perfectible Body: the Western Ideal of Male Physical Development. New York: Continuum, 1995. 321-55. Print.

Etcoff, Nancy. "Size Matters." Survival of the Prettiest: The Science of Beauty. 167-204. Print.

Freud, Sigmund, and Elisabeth Young-Bruehl. Freud on Women: a Reader. New York: W.W. Norton, 1990. Print.

Sex and the City… Friend or Foe?

Entering into my fourth year living in New York I have come to accept the fact that Carrie, Miranda, Charlotte and Samantha have lied to me. The carefree, bugetless lifestyle with which these thin, white, middleclass women live doesn’t really exist. I have come to accept the fact that attractive, single, successful men are not on every corner, that I can’t just pick up a dress from Bergdorf’s on a whim, and that cocktail hour doesn’t take place on a daily basis. I recognize that I can’t eat whatever I want and have Carrie’s six-pack abs or just show up to the most exclusive bar/restaurant in town and get in, that in real New York City there are a lot more doors that are shut than open. All of this is good and fine, but what is really the bummer is that the women who used to be my super heroes, are not all that empowered and independent.

The sitcom’s aim was the “deconstruction of sexual and social conventions” through the portrayal of four single, economically independent women living in New York City (Sex and the City, Kiss and Tell 26). Through a sexual discourse, in which the sexual encounters are narrated from the female standpoint, the show attempts to reverse the roles in the heterosexual relationship. Sex is openly discussed, in public spaces (the coffee shop) down to the last detail, portraying the women as the subjects and the men as the objects of the conversation. More importantly, the “dozens of hotbed topics: blow jobs, threesomes, twenty-somethings, anal sex, secret sex, and why vibrators are better than men” are used to suggest a type of liberation for women, a fostering of feminism and deviation away from societal norms regarding sexuality (Sex and the City, Kiss and Tell 26).

If only this was really the case. In The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty are Used Against Women, Naomi Wolf examines the medias’ construction of a myth of inclusion and the illusion of freedom, directed mainly at women, dubbed the “beauty myth”. She argues that the present societal ideals serve a purpose, “often a financial one, namely to increase the profits of those advertisers whose ad dollars actually drove the media that, in turn, created the ideals” (3). However, Wolf recognizes that these beliefs and values are rarely acknowledged or questioned by society. Subsequently, she posits that the “social limits to women’s lives” have been transposed “directly onto our faces and bodies”(270). Hence female liberation is permanently fastened to female beauty.

Correspondingly, in Narcissism as Liberation, Susan J. Douglas analyzes the representation of female liberation of the 1980s in the form of narcissism with an emphasis on performance, precision and control. She explains, “women’s liberation became equated with women’s ability to do whatever they wanted for themselves, whenever they wanted, no matter what the expense” (246). Hence the female appearance was seen as something women could have complete control over. Douglas further posits that the female appearance served as “indicators of a woman’s potential for success” (260). The perfecting of the body to fit in with the beauty ideal was acknowledged as a woman’s access to freedom and control. On the contrary, Douglas argues “the ‘new woman’ of the 1980s then, perpetuated and legitimated the most crass, selfish aspects of consumer capitalism and thus served to distort and deny the most basic and revolutionary principles of feminism” (266).

Karen E. Dill examines the way in which these constructed images of the beauty ideal are converted from fantasy to reality through the mass media. She argues that fantasy; “a prepackaged, mass produced vision” dominates reality (89). Dill explains that the availability and oversaturation of media images is thus inverted as the norm due to its prevalence. Hence our three-dimensional self takes a backseat to the two-dimensional self. Dill’s analysis of this transformation in our way of seeing and thinking reveals the repercussions on the individual’s internalization of these ideologies. She explains, “for women, the result is almost certainly feelings of inadequacy, even guilt and shame, and the belief that we are failures a women” (132). This feeling of guilt circles back to this idea of control over one’s appearance. A woman’s inability to attain the (unrealistic) beauty ideal is seen her lack of control.

Additionally, Dill surveys the way in which these representations of reality are framed within the media. She elucidates, “representation means that members of difference races, sexes, and other social groups should be portrayed proportionally in the media—in a way that is roughly similar to their numbers in the larger social group they represent” (93). However, this is not truly the case in the media, as certain representations are given more value and exposure than others. Dill argues that this underrepresentation of a group tells “a subtle story about race, gender, sexual orientation, and other traits” (94).

So how does this have a crash and burn affect on our image of the women in Sex and the City? Wolf asks, “Does a woman’s sexuality correspond to what she looks like? Does she have the right to sexual pleasure and self-esteem because she’s a person, or must she earn that right through “beauty” as she used to through marriage?” (271). Sadly, in the case of our four friends, Carrie, Miranda, Samantha and Charlotte, the answer is yes. The woman’s sexuality, sexual pleasure and self-esteem are only issued to those women who are considered “beautiful” and yes it does come with a lifetime supply of male dependence.

Both in the show and in Wolf and Douglas’s opinion, feminism is fastened to society’s image of ideal beauty and femininity. All four of the women are petite and dress in youthful clothing. Furthermore the body is still invoked to define the woman’s power and control within her relationships. Sex while, openly discussed in explicit detail, only “reinforces female dependence on the male approval” (Douglas 249). Hence the sexual practices of all four of the main characters cannot take place without a male figure. Unfortunately, Samantha’s declarations of having sex like a man only further fortifies “the media’s most popular—and pernicious—distortions of feminism: that ambitious women want, or should want, to be just like men” (Douglas 262). Additionally, the frame through which we see these supposed acts of female liberation in Sex and the City reflect a narrow representation. All four of our friends are young, thin, white, and economically successful, the perfect model of the beauty myth.

Either way, whether or not Carrie, Miranda, Samantha and Charlotte can still be considered our friends, the show is over…. So who has come in to fill their shoes? Who serves as the new representation of women?

Works Cited

Dill, Karen E. "Issues in Media and Social Learning: Rap Music, Beauty and Domestic Violence." How Fantasy Becomes Reality: Seeing Through Influence. 132-40. Print.

Douglas, Susan J. "Narcissism as Liberation." Where the Girls Are: Growing Up Female with the Mass Media. 245-68. Print.

Sohn, Amy, and Sarah Wildman. Sex and the City: Kiss and Tell. New York: Pocket, 2004. Print.

Wolf, Naomi. The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty Are Used Against Women. Print.

Do we really have to be scared of ugliness anymore?

In Beauty, Scurton posses the question, “What is ugliness and why do we flee from it?” (Scurton 4). From the readings it appears that ugliness is continually determined in relation to beauty. This binary serves as a rigid way of understanding the world around us. In History of Beauty, Umberto Eco surmises that this binary originated from the portrayal of ideal beauty. He explains, “Beauty has been identified with proportion” (History of Beauty, 61). From the perspective of ancient Greek culture, beauty had a distinct composition. Therefore, he argues, “it’s natural that all beings who did not embody such proportions were thought of as ugly” (On Ugliness, 23). In this sense, beauty does create a specific space that is marked by the inclusion of some and the exclusion of others. Hence, Eco is arguing that ugliness only exists as a response or lack of beauty.

As Eco observes, the process of demonization has always taken place to depict “the Other, the foreigner” (On Ugliness 185). The other is interpreted as a deviation to what has been deemed the “norm”. However this deviation is emphasized mainly through the physicality and is seen as intrinsic attributes that are immutable. Hence the physical features have come to be associated with one’s character, extending the non-physical to the physical. In this sense, one’s character is defined from the outside in.

In Typecasting: On the Arts and Sciences of Human Inequality, Ewen & Ewen discuss the photographic research of Alphonse Bertillon in the late 19^th century. Photography was seen as a way to capture “irrefutable proof of essential human differences” (Typecasting 226). Furthermore Ewen & Ewen argue that photography served to support the theory that “the taxonomic order of living things was predicated on the idea that the character of each individual organism was defined by its relationship to a clearly demarcated physical standard” (Typecasting 223). Therefore, individuals could be classified by these physical differences. Like the ancient Greek culture, perfection or the lack thereof was determined by a physical standard as a means to identify and compartmentalize individuals. In Bertillon’s opinion, an individual’s identity was fixed, an “immutable legacy” that served as a means to “see an individual in the milieu of the crowd” (Typecasting 230, 234).

In today’s society is one’s physical appearance truly immutable? With the development of various products and procedures can one’s character truly be determined from the outside? Can ugliness be detected from the physical appearance?

One example of this ability to alter ones appearance can be seen in Spanx products. While the change might be slight in this case, the individual is still able to have control over his or her appearance. One of the brand’s slogans declares, “Super-duper shaping… Get instantly transformed!” (www.spanx.com). In this sense, is there really a fear of ugliness anymore?

Bibliography:

Eco, Umberto. On Ugliness. Trans. Alastair McEwen. New York: Rizzoli, 2007. Print.

Ewen, and Ewen. "Finding the Individual Within the Group." Typecasting: On the Arts and Sciences of Human Inequality. 223-34. Print.

Scruton, Richard. Beauty. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.

In or Out cont.

Socks and Sandals...

"boyfriend" jeans...

The fuzzy look...

These are some fashion trends, on the runway, in the magazines and on the street that the blogger discusses. What do you think? Can these be considered beautiful? Does the item/s of clothing enhance the individual's beauty? What type of statement are these items of clothing trying to make?

(all photos courtesy of Manrepeller.com)

In or Out?

In History of Beauty, Umberto Eco grapples with the means by which beauty is determined and further how beauty is used within society. He explains that beauty is “an adjective that we often employ to indicate something that we like” (Eco 8). Hence, beauty is subjective as the individual determines the value of beauty. Furthermore, he states that there is a “close relationship forged by the modern age between Beauty and Art” (Eco 10). As we discussed in class, this correlation revolves around the importance of perspective and judgment.

Correspondingly, in Beauty, Richard Scurton surmises “style is one of the features of everyday aesthetic judgment that we carry over into art, where it takes on a wholly new significance” (Scurton 93). Style becomes art when it is expressed through fashion. The portrayal of beauty in style, more specifically in fashion is thus shaped by the employment of aesthetic choice. While Scurton explains, “fashion is a guide to aesthetic choices”, these choices are not necessarily recognized universally as beautiful (Scurton 93). Nonetheless, fashion “communicates meanings” and frames the world around us (Scurton 93). Therefore the aesthetic choices that are purposed through fashion, can be acknowledged as innovative and “allude to a certain form of life”, but do not have to address what is considered the ideal beauty of the specific time (Scurton 92).

This discourse on aesthetic judgment and choice prompted me to evaluate the blog entitled “The Man Repeller” http://www.manrepeller.com/. The blog serves as a commentary on fashion trends and their place within “the everyday social existence” (Scurton 93). More specifically, the blog addresses trends that are regarded as “offensive way that will result in repelling members of the opposite sex” (The Man Repeller). She constantly relates new fashion trends back to something that society has deemed to be ugly. While the blogger recognizes the absurdity and sometimes truly “ugliness” of these trends, she is guilty of supporting and taking pleasure in them as well.

As we observe, fashion, at times, does not engage with the body in ways that would be universally considered flattering or beautiful. However the entire fashion industry revolves around the body and expressing one’s self through the expression of one’s body. This generates some questions: Is beauty of ultimate value in regards to fashion? Is fashion trying to redefine what we consider beautiful or ugly? How is fashion internalized when it is observed as a commodity rather than as art? Is there a difference between fashion as an art form and fashion as a commodity?

However fashion is not only expressed through the trends produced in the fashion industry. As Scurton explains, fashion is a “communal adoption of style” that takes place in everyday life (Scurton 93). In Metropolis: Beauty Ideals Worldwide (shorts), we examined various physical appearance practices that take place around the world, Mustaches of Egypt, Wigs in Israel and Perfect Body of Suriname. In all of these instances, it is apparent that beauty is defined for the person rather than the other way around. In this sense, the individual takes part in performing and observing beauty. There is an underlying theme in all three of these films that discusses tradition or a “passing down” of aesthetic choices.

Correspondingly, these customs or symbols of what constitute beauty contribute to the process of defining space. As David Morley observes in Home Territories: Media, Mobility and Identity, “a unified sense of self and nation” originates from an “image of unity” (Morley 31). This image of unity emphasizes a “common” character, which a group of individuals possess. While in today’s society fashion does not necessarily have to be culturally specific, aesthetic choices do aid in the placement of individuals within society. Furthermore, this creation of the spaces within society “depends on the exclusion or ‘othering’ of any foreign element that disrupts that image of unity” (Morley 31). Morley emphasizes the process of exclusion as a primary component in the defining of a specific space. Again, we see a binary discourse. Through this process, boundaries can be visually comprehensible.

In this light, does beauty create a specific space within society? If so, is this space universal, or nation/culture specific?

Bibliography:

Eco, Umberto, and Alastair McEwen. History of Beauty. New York: Rizzoli, 2004. Print.

The Man Repeller. Web. 01 Oct. 2010. .

Morley, David. Home Territories: Media, Mobility and Identity. London: Routledge,

2000. Print.

Scruton, Richard. Beauty. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.