Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Miss Representation & Tough Guise: A Reflection

-->
            

        
          The films, Miss Representation (2011), and Tough Guise (1999), commentate on dysfunctional representations of masculinity and femininity in mainstream media and culture. While Miss Representation focuses primarily on the objectification of women in pop-culture, Tough Guise explores the reverberations of perfunctory messages defining masculinity. 
Jennifer Newsom in Miss Representation (2011), describes how from a very young age women learn what is desirable and internalize these ideals. Women are conditioned to please, and not cause drama; they are expected to embody multitudinous yet incongruous social roles. Women should be the perfect mom, victoria’s secret model, career-go-getter, and house-wife, all in one.
My sisters, myself, and many of my friends have struggled with eating disorders; many women in my family and friend-circles have struggled with substance abuse and self-harm; my sisters, my friends and myself have all been subject to sexual discrimination, harassment, or assault. As is described in both films, this is not unusual. One doesn’t have to look very far for confirmation; these are some statistics from anti-violence organizations RAINN and Futures Without Violence, “every 2 minutes, someone in the United States is sexually assaulted; 1 in 3 women will be a victim of rape in her lifetime; 1 in 4 women will experience intimate partner violence in her lifetime,” among other dire facts.  
The plight of women’s struggles, although extremely relevant, is practically old hat. So I appreciate how Tough Guise (Jhally, 1999) brings to light the social pandemic affecting young boys and men as well. Katz, a writer for Tough Guise, illustrates how current conceptualizations of femininity and masculinity feed each other. For example, the waif-trend is a symbolic call for women to ‘take up less space,’ in a world where they are asserting equality and how men’s violence against women could be viewed as a backlash to their perception of constrained masculinity. Yet Katz (1999) argues, “there’s nothing inherent about masculinity [and femininity]; its about playing a role defined by larger social structures.” We live in a society where masculinity is equated with violence and femininity is equated with sexual objectification—no wonder rape is pervasive.
Walk into any bar, gym, or house-party, and you can pinpoint countless men, if not the majority, putting on their ‘guise.’ It is with great empathy that I have been enlightened to the intense societal pressures unremittingly exerted on men. While it would not be audacious for a woman to stand up against sexual discrimination or vouch for curves, men aren’t given permission by society to emotionally explore the effects of pernicious gender messages on their psyche.  It could be argued that women have gotten better at distancing themselves from harmful media messages. Personally, I have come to a place where I can watch E! News and eat Annie’s Mac’Ncheese at the same time, because I recognize that the media is selling an image for a profit. Through consciousness, I have created a space for glorifying the perfectly imperfect.
            Katz and Newsom identify some cogs behind the wheels of structural violence: patriarchy and capitalism. Patriarchy, as defined by Sommers-Flanagan (2012), is the ideology in which attributes associated with masculinity, such as power, control, dominance are privileged and those associated with femininity, emotiveness, compassion, empathy, care, equality, are devalued (p. 340). White patriarchy has been the automatic gear for the United States since its inception. Men, particularly white men, dominate the spheres of cultural influence: politics, corporate enterprise, entertainment and media industries.
As is described in Miss Representation (2011), it’s all about capitalism. Corporations are only concerned with the bottom line and if they make a profit out of hyper-masculinity, sexual deviance, and voyeurism, this is what they will promote. Corporate impunity is bought via political campaigns; democratic checks on media are usurped to maintain the status quo. And so long as men dictate policy, scripts, and advertisement, malignant cultural norms persist. It is not individual men and women who are flawed, although it is important to recognize the potential for change on an interpersonal level— it is the atrocious cultural definitions of gender that we enact, conceived by the media.
Katz (1999) alludes to how change has to be two-fold- on an interpersonal level and from the top-down. We, as young individuals, have to be courageous by challenging social norms and instigating dialogue. Consciousness is the first step. In recognizing how the messages from mainstream media dictate our self-concepts in relation to society, we can choose to call out these deleterious scripts and rewrite the dialogue. Conceptions of masculinity and femininity are not written in our DNA—these are learned worldviews.
There definitely seems to be a gap in dialogue between the sexes. Women are always talking about men, and men (I think?) are talking about women, yet there is hardly any crossover. We are left in gendered wonderland where both sexes are speculating about the others’ motives or mental status. I think the first step in creating a space for empathy is to lift the taboo of ‘men are from Mars, women are from Venus.’ The fact is, either way both sexes are vilified by damaging societal messages and exploring that common ground of oppression could be an impetus for change. 
The good news is that culture is malleable, as is socialization. Our society has already made so many great leaps forward: gay marriage was legalized in two states and was up for vote in even more; the Violence Against Women Act (V.A.W.A.) was revamped just this past week to include language about the protection of minorities (Bendery, 2013). Individually, we should advocate for healthier conceptualizations of gender, but simultaneously, we have a duty to make our sentiments known to the top-tiers of power. Gender may always be a point of contention, but the discourse is not deterministic.

References

Bendery, J. (2013, Feb. 22). VAWA 2013: House GOP Unveils Bill With No LGBT Protections, Modified Tribal Provision. The Huffington Post, retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/22/vawa-2013_n_2742096.html
Jhally, S. (Director), & Katz, J. (Writer). (1999). Tough Guise: Violence, Media, & the Crisis in Masculinity. Media Education Fountdation.
Futures Without Violence. The Faces on Domestic, Dating, and Sexual Violence. Retrieved from http://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/content/action_center/detail/754,
Newsom, J. (Director). (2011). Miss Representation. Girls’ Club Entertainment.
RAINN: Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network. Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.rainn.org/statistics
Sommers-Flanagan, J. & Sommers-Flanagan, R. (2012). Counseling and Psychotherapy Theories in Context and Practice (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

No comments:

Post a Comment