Tabloids and Legitimatizing Plastic Surgery

Popular tabloid magazines normally glorify the way cosmetic surgery reconcile the way celebrities  are viewed by others as well as themselves. Earlier, when The Hills star, Heidi Montag shared her account of getting her first breast augmentation US magazine quoted her on the cover to introduce the article: “Boys used to always make fun of how flat I was.” Montag smiles on the cover beside the quote, glowing that she now has enough cleavage to escape verbal abuse from males. More recently, Teen Mom’s Farrah Abraham was featured on the cover of inTouch magazine which boasts that the reality star has undergone 3 surgeries by age 21.

 The same issue vaguely criticizes plastic surgery at a young age by highlighting pictures of Miley Cyrus, Kristen Stewart and Taylor Swift on the cover who are rumored to have had plastic surgeries as well.

This hypocritical view is not uncommon among the tabloid industry. When Heidi Montag proceeded undergo 10 plastic surgery procedures in one day, People magazine promoted the story with an exclusive photo shoot and coverage on the cosmetic splurge while including underlying critical language directed towards Montag such as “addicted” and “obsessed.” The tabloid industry shames female icons into looking their best, but does not hesitate to reprimand them for becoming possessed by the pressures to be superficially “perfect.”

Ultimately, celebrities like Abraham and Montag are airbrushed, perfected and encouraged by funds for their drastic actions toward their bodies. The inTouch article covering Farrah’s story quotes her saying, “I no longer have to hate on my nose!” Women look at female figures featured on tabloid magazines closely because they dictate certain standards for beauty and success in our culture. If these messages continue to endorse plastic surgery, than they are neglecting the major issue women and men face to accept the appearances of others and themselves.  

The Hated Female Leader Icon

According to the Miss Representation documentary, women make up 51% of the entire US population. The same source declared that females also make up 17% of the 535 seats in the US Congress, 3% of Fortune 500 CEOs , 3% of clout positions in mainstream media and a mere 18% of the country’s leadership titles.

Here is a closer look at the detailed chart of Love Social's Women in Numbers which I accessed through Miss Representation's website.

So why doesn't half of the US population want to contribute to country’s major business and political guidance?

While there are many cultural and social factors we are face that weigh on this issue, the depiction of female leaders in mainstream media is a particularly critical phenomenon. The images we see on television and in movies mold our attitudes toward societal norms and the choices we make; consequently, if a certain occupation or lifestyle is repeatedly portrayed as unattractive or objectionable, we are more than likely to discriminate against it. Today, the reality is that when a female protagonist assumes a powerful role in leadership in the TV or cinema, there is a common formula that her success will diminish as a positive result.

          An early example of this method is found in Sweet Home Alabama (2002), Melanie Smooter (Reese Witherspoon) reinvents herself by taking on a successful position in the fashion career in New York City. When she returns to her Southern hometown to finally get her divorce papers (after 7 years of waiting) signed by her imbalanced ex, she is gradually persuaded to resign from the career she worked for and go back to her husband. The plot develops to illustrate that by abandoning her role as a leader, she retrieved her morals.

           Typically, these female protagonists like Melanie are introduced as icy, insensitive and disliked. A common idea is that a woman in such a powerful position has no capacity for love, friends or a family in such a rank. Routinely, they are initiated into the picture as “the bitch.” These women in authority in movies are unlikable and are gradually tamed as before the picture concludes.

           Another female “boss” is “tamed” (by a man in this case) in The Proposal (2009) where Margaret Tate (Sandra Bullock) driven, ambitious and diligent; however, according to Hollywood, the wonderful qualities are rarely given to a woman unless she is also distant, aggressive and widely despised by her inferiors. Margaret is a chief editor at a New York Publisher and a classic “bitch” we see in such influential female positions that Hollywood offers. New in Town (2009) with Renee Zellweger presents the protagonist specifically as CEO and the enemy turns out to be her career.

       Beyond the cinema, girls are punished for possessing qualities of a leader in television as well. In the popular television series Gossip Girl (2007-2012) best friends, Blair Waldorf and Serena van der Woodsen are our female leads. Blair is ambitious, hardworking and is a born leader. On the other hand, Serena is charismatic and adored by men but not especially driven-often taking time off to party and “figure out” what she wants to do. Unfortunately, Blair is represented as frustratingly bossy and disliked in the end; however, the drama’s plot never fails to reward Serena for sexually objectifying herself and gliding through life thanks to her greatest asset: her appearance.

        So who wants to be the boss now? If the female leader is repeatedly doomed to be that “bitchy” girl who is despised and unpopular than obviously no girl will want to be her when they “grow up”. Through these repeated images we are constantly discouraging girls from cultivating their ambitions and leadership abilities.

Everyone needs people skills to be leaders in reality. We can inspire young women though the media and tell them just that. We can also tell them that as “the boss” they will be still be loved, esteemed and admired.

Why are Girls Dumping Abercrombie & Fitch?

Abercrombie & Fitch has had a substantial history of unethical methods of operation, many resulting in lawsuits. Racial, religious and gender discrimination, sexual harassment charges and offensive remarks made by CEO Mike Jeffries have all contributed the store's controversial past and the consequences it has met. According to Buzzfeed, Women's Abercrombie and Fitch brand clothing sales have declined by 30% in the last quarter, adding to the company's reported 10% total deficit.  In this article, I want to consider the company's representation of gender as it has weighed on this issue because women's sales in specific have decreased.

In my middle school and earlier high school years, my friends and I pretty much shopped at Abercrombie and Hollister stores exclusively. I did not care that the walls were covered with what was essentially soft-core pornographic images because that was the kind of thing our moms may as well criticize. I think this attitude I shared with other young shoppers dwindled as the brand remained focused on their sexual appeal and perhaps less on the merchandise itself. While the clothes themselves are never too racy, the company's appearance in the media capitalizes on communicating objectified portrayals of both women and men such as their prevalent method of featuring semi-nudity. This technique may be replicating the trends of advertising sex in high fashion campaigns because Abercrombie and Fitch is a self-proclaimed luxury brand; however, they are still mainstream retail.

Magazine ads, emails and social media communication promoted by Abercrombie & Fitch brands have constantly featured suggestive innuendos and gender objectification. For example, a recent article on the brand in Bust Magazine's website drew attention to an ad by Gilly Hicks (a lingerie brand by Abercrombie & Fitch) pictured below:

The Bust article also notes the somewhat creepy lines the company declares: “Gilly Hicks makes the hottest Push ’Em Up bras and the cutest Down Undies for young, naturally beautiful, confident girls.” The way this claim sexualizes young girls reminds me of when Abercrombie Kids introduced a line of thong underwear in preteen children's sizes (which was later discontinued in response to protests).

The approach A&F has taken in conditioning women-especially younger girls-with sexualized campaigns may be a factor in the stores recent shortcomings considering it the brand has employed it far more than actual product promotions. Stores that are currently performing better in sales to women like H&M, Forever 21 and Charlotte Russe do not use these promotional methods to the same degree as A&F, which may indicate that they have less influence on female consumers now. Fortunately, A&F brands have progressed in some ways such as abandoning racial discrimination in their advertisements. Hopefully, since A&F brands are still alive and have some power potential, they will choose to employ healthier representations in advertisements to resume the influence they used to have. 

Sitcom Stereotypes

The popular American sitcom, the Big Bang Theory is a perfect example of how our perception of class and gender roles is influenced by popular sitcoms today. Beautiful, blonde, Penny moves across the hall from two genius physicists. Penny is portrayed as sexy, fun, popular and socially proficient; however, her inadequate education and economic conditions constantly embarrass her. Penny failed to graduate from community college and currently provides for herself by waitressing. Many of the comic situations of the show involving interaction between Penny and her smarter neighbors make our female lead look dumb and insecure. When she begins to date one of her brilliant neighbors, she reveals early in the relationship that she's insecure he'll want "a girl who doesn't have to look up words he says in the dictionary when she gets home." Some episodes focus on Penny struggling to appear "smart" and "sexy" for her new boyfriend. Similar to the front she puts up in this clip below where Penny's smarter boyfriend asks her what she was up to "7 years ago" to which she replies "I was in high school. I was studying, keeping my notes clean, doing volunteer work for the community..."

               When Penny's response is immediately followed by a clip of a clueless teenaged version of herself staring confusedly at a pregnancy test and its instructions until her face lights up, she exclaims "Not pregnant!" Reinforcing Penny's reputation as a stereotypical dumb blonde, this scene also tells viewers that the attractive, fun girl is not concerned with school or volunteer work because those are issues we leave to the unattractive, smart people. 

               On the other hand, the males of this show are victims of stereotyping just as much if not even more than Penny. Penny's various boyfriends (besides her specific neighbor) are always muscular and pitifully stupid while her brilliant neighbors lack muscle and are socially awkward.

               In contrast, Modern Family's character Alex Dunphy struggles as a social reject but is known for her high intelligence and academic success while her more attractive, popular  sister resembles Penny's persona and capabilities.

               More prime time comedies like, Subergatory and The Middle are continuously utilizing similar character models to reinforce messages that tell us blonde waitresses are dumb, privileged people cannot possess street smarts, and 'book smart' people are socially awkward. Even though some of these shows may imagine they parodying such typecasts I would argue that this method is overused and perhaps it is time for new characters and to ditch the our outdated stereotypes.

Primetime Infomercials?

             Perusing the clearance section at a specialty  retail store I came across a brown artificial leather mini skirt labeled "As Featured on Fashion Star" with a thick silver tag. The unfortunate garment which was marked down from $69.90 to just under 24 dollars was held together at the top with a glittery, cheap waistband. I was later informed by a sales associate that the skirt was one of the few quickly sold out products presented by the TV reality contest show, Fashion Star. NBC network's Fashion Star is just one example out of a host of prime time reality TV shows that are strewn with product placement features. Here's how the show works: a group of competing designers create fashion pieces  to present to judges Jessica Simpson, Nicole Richie, John Varvatos and a few professional retail buyers including Macy's  Saks 5th Avenue, Express and H&M (depending on the season). Celebrity mentors offer their critiques and ultimately, the professional buyers will bid on which products to order for their respective companies to sell. This is a dynamic way to challenge designers and showcase their talent; however, this does not appear to be on top of the show's agenda.

              

        This particular advertising technique is effective because after a style piece is approved by fashion queen, Nicole Richie or competed for at high prices by eminent buyers, it receives momentous status and social value. After it is accessible in chain retail stores the next day, consumers will devour it; whether it is the winning, skilled couture piece or the brown synthetic mini (as I found) that is destined to returned.

               After the ubiquitous promotional material endorsing the show's three primary retail corporation appears throughout the episode's introduction and progression, Maybelline New York cosmetics make a routine appearance as the models prepare for the runway. Now many reality competitions follow a similar advertising model, including, Bravo's The Fashion Show and The CW's America's Next Top Model. Even the highly successful Project Runway (which I personally love) is unfortunately strewn with product placement techniques that invade our entertainment hours.

               Most of us have fallen victim to advertisements incorporated into the plot lines of primetime fictional drama and comedy series. A character might casually recommend or advocate a specific brand product in one way or another. Personally, I always feel this part takes away some of the 'magic' or, in some circumstances, undermines the drama of the entertainment. Most of us feel ripped off because we pay for an allotted leisure viewing time uninterrupted by commercials . On the other hand, this new approach of airing an entire television series to operate essentially as lengthy advertisements like, Fashion Star takes this aspect of marketing culture to a different level.

               

            In reality, this is our prime time entertainment that we are paying for to view on major, wealthy networks; not the revenue-oriented, borderline infomercials that are glamorized to seduce primetime viewers. It is our to right to receive the entertainment we are paying for during the network's promised entertainment  hours product placement during network's respective commercial time. We should have authority in what we grant our time and money to.