My first media feminist course in junior college (Cegep) was Images of Women in Media and the focus was on--obviously--image. Because of my mother, I wasn't a novice at feministing and such, but looking at how women are portrayed in a movie, or magazine, or story is a good starting point for a foundation in critical thinking.Then I moved on to university which broadened and deepened my understanding of sexism and racism and ismism to more than just How People Are Portrayed.
On that note... I just read a great post about the fashion industry, by hanna brooks olsen*, that attempts to pull the "image" issues--the easier surface issues--away for a moment, in order to look at some other aspects of the industry.
Surface issues like: Is there only one beauty type in modeling? Is it unfair to judge women models by their looks? Do runway models promote eating disorders? Ms. olsen takes issue with some of these points, but I don't want to engage on them because THE POINT, for me, is that we spend so much time on those issues that we don't talk about anything else.
Such as two other points she made:
* That financial shows only talk about this female-driven industry during fashion week, and do so in a condescending or downright sexist manner (please go read the quote by the Duke law professor on her blog, and then Be Outraged);
* That in fashion circles a female journalist can wear makeup and five inch heels and not be asked if she's someone's girlfriend, as she would be in most other media circles. Why why??
So here's my concern. If we spend all our time having not-overly-informed debates on the-same-old-fashion-issues are we sidestepping The Man and attacking our own?
I'm not saying we should never talk about The Usual Suspects of the fashion world, if only because I hate the lack of fashion choice available for my size 16ness at Zellers. But I do think it's time we ratcheted up the research and thought behind our discourse. We're not in junior college anymore. :-)
Please read Ms. olsen's post. Eez good. I hope she posts more on this topic, because I don't have time to read all the good fashion business and political stuff she obviously follows--I need someone to summarize it for me!
_______
* Julie-Lunarmom-Betty's daughter.
8 comments:
There was always so much to dissect in the way fashion "imagined" women, class, ethnicity ... thin, tall, white women were the ideal and women of other ethnicity or sizes were exotic bits of Other or even their very own category of oddity. Moreover, the price tag on the wisps of fabric mass produced by underpaid and mistreated women, and the globalism/disparity inherent in that, is ignored. Except in, strangely, the movie Zoolander. I'm still convinced that's a brilliant political piece, BTW.
'tis true that in the very act of resisting an idea or concept we can actually be upholding the underlying presumption. (For example, the argument over what a "liberated woman" wears, accepts the premise that women be judged by what they wear, and that there is only one Correct Uniform... Etc...)
Verification Word game: sychodic - a mental disorder complicated by poor spelling skills.
Note to self: Do not make a decision about clicking on Miss Mabel's links in the morning until after third cup of tea (depending on the topic, of course)
When the fashion industry decides that stuff that I can wear, (plus sizes, and over 50) more importantly, what I WANT to wear (tailored, bright colours) is just as valued as what they currently parade before us (pun intended) Then I might be a little more understanding of the inequities inherent in the industry. And don't get me started on the exploitative manufacturing side of things!
**makes make another pot of tea to soothe incipient rage**
P.S. Love the pink pumps!
I love Hanna's post and I agree that fashion as an industry deserves more respect but I gotta tell ya that I see those heels on those shoes and I just can't help but be pissed off.
Who exactly decided that a woman's legs look better when she stands on tip toes? Because that's what those shoes are doing. It's not as damaging as the idiots who decided a woman's feet looked better when they'd been bound to keep from growing past age 6. But it does have some of the same slowing-women-down aspects.
Can you imagine a man making his way through life on 4 inch spike heels because someone decided it made a man's legs sexier?
Well wow! I'm not sure what to say here... uh, thank you (yeah, that's a good place to start)! Such a good post, and so insightful. You and Han should team up! Oh wait, all that brain power might cause sun spot explosions or something.
Julie
I love Zoolander!
All valid points, and I've made them all myself in the past. Except for the manufacturing stuff--that's a really gray gray topic, or at least I found it to be so when I studied East Asian politics.
But I'm going to read the writer that Hana quoted and give it all some more thought! Hmm HMMMM.
PS sorry about the rage. Next time I'll post a kitten at the end or something.
LOL ... Kittehs is kool
Post a Comment