Glamour cover, August 2012.
For college-aged women, magazines like Cosmopolitan and Glamour claim to be the ultimate source for information on sex and romantic relationships. And such magazines are incredibly effective in reaching their target audience- over ?60% of college-aged women?read at least one issue per month? (Kim and Ward 2004:49). While even a cursory glance at Cosmopolitan reveals its articles to support a model of sexuality that is exclusively heterosexual and based in notions about ?natural? differences between men?s and women?s romantic and sexual preferences, it is important to consider the ways in which readers interact with the models of sexuality presented in women?s magazines. The tools readers have to critically assess these concepts are determined by the ways in which these magazines frame information for their readers. Women?s magazines present monogamous, long-term relationships with men as the ultimate goal for women, but draw on pseudo-scientific sources, including online surveys and so-called ?sex experts,? for their advice about sexuality (Daly et al. 2012:105). They present men as a homogenous group whose motivations are indecipherable to women without the advice presented in magazines. Though readers may be critical of the material presented in women?s magazines, it is difficult to be confident in those critiques when the information is attributed to experts. This process promotes the consumption of magazines to improve sexual and romantic relationships, rather than encouraging interpersonal communication to address problems.
The foundation for magazines? narrow definition of romantic relationships is the prevailing presentation of gender as a binary and of the behaviors associated with the two genders as biological qualities. As Leonore Tiefer notes, the description of men?s and women?s sexual and romantic behaviors as ?natural? is a rhetorical strategy, that ?gives whatever is being discussed solidity and validity,? in part by presenting it as in ?contrast with culture, as if anything human-made can be the result of trickery? (2004:33). An article from the August 2012 issue of Cosmopolitan entitled ?Why Are We So into Heroes?? highlights this approach, informing the reader that heroic feats by men should be attractive to her because ?every woman is inherently drawn to men who can protect and provide for her and her future babies? (Dobransky 2012:24). The article even concludes with the declaration that ?culture is no match for human biology? in determining desirable qualities in a partner (Dobransky 2012:24). Associating certain behaviors with one of two socially constructed genders and then explaining those differences as based in nature perpetuates dominant romantic and sexual scripts, particularly the stereotypical notions of men as aggressive and sex-focused and women as passive and relationship-oriented. This view is also expressed in the ?Why Are We So into Heroes?? article, which claims men are ?biologically compelled to be the leading man? and paints women as interested in men for their relationship and reproductive potential (Dobransky 2012:24). Such an approach is problematic not only for the rigid gender roles it promotes (contributing to the already dangerous social environment for those who defy those standards), but also for the distance it creates between heterosexual men and women, leading women to believe that men are by nature different and that their motivations are unknowable without the aid of scientific research.
?The #1 Quality Men Want in Bed? Women?s magazines present men as a singular entity- and instruct women in how to fulfill the desires of men. (Cosmopolitan, pp. 105, August 2012).
Women?s magazines draw on the notions that men are biologically ?sex-focused and out of control? (Kim and Ward 2004:50) and that women find men to be ?the underlying source of?fulfilment, security, and happiness? (Farvid and Braun 2006:299) in order to encourage women to pursue a long-term, heterosexual, and monogamous relationship above all other romantic or sexual experiences. It is in the interest of women?s magazines to present this type of relationship as the natural inclination and ultimate goal of all women because advice on monogamous relationships is exactly what they dispense. Articles in women?s magazines draw on broad notions of ?what men want? to present their readers with models for behavior designed to attract and keep a boyfriend. Articles like ?What Men Think,? from Glamour?s August 2012 issue, purport to identify the qualities that all men want in a woman, enabling the reader to mold herself to those standards. These pieces draw on testimony from men, whether purely anecdotal or based on polls conducted by the magazine, to make statements like ?guys spend a lot of time day-dreaming about women?s bodies? (Aiello 2012:98) and ?Seventy-eight percent of the men Glamour polled said that they would rather date a slightly overweight woman with confidence than a supermodel who hates her body? (Aiello 2012:100). Men?s opinions are used to present a single idea of what men want in women, and their esteemed status as a source of advice only promotes the idea that a woman?s appearance and behavior is ultimately intended for a heterosexual male audience. While it is important to consider that the prevalence of such ideas in women?s magazines does not mean that they are ??automatically? absorbed by the readers? (Farvid and Braun 2006:297), a study by George Bielay and Edward S. Herold on the use of magazines as a source for sexual information found that advice on ?improving one?s sex life? and ?what men like/want sexually? were the most common types of information women sought from magazines, indicating that readers do turn to these magazines to supplement their supposedly lacking knowledge (1995:254). By building on the prevalent social idea that ?natural? gender roles make men focused almost exclusively on sex and women on relationships, women?s magazines construct heterosexual male opinions of women as essential advice that can help readers to achieve the ultimate goal of a long-term monogamous relationship. In the process, this approach not only privileges the opinions and desires of a certain group of men above those of women, but also aids in imparting the message that the reader?s romantic and sexual abilities are inadequate without the aid of expert advice found in such magazines.
?4 Talks You Should Have Had by Now? Articles which inform the reader of their shortcomings in relationships- and offer alternative models- are prevalent (Cosmopolitan, pp. 118, August 2012).
As women?s magazines present men as being in possession of a ?male sexual drive? that does not allow men to ?refuse an opportunity for ?no strings attached? sex,? they make a point of providing their female readers with the sexual and social skills necessary ?to keep men from ?straying?? (Farvid and Braun 2006:303). Relationships are presented as a delicate balancing act in which a woman must ensure sexual pleasure for her partner, follow a predetermined model of romantic progression, and may only ask her partner to modify his sexual behavior in ways that do not damage his ?male ego? (Farvid and Braun 2006:304). The ubiquity of articles doling out guidance on sexual technique, such as the piece ?52 Sex Tips: Wow Your Man with These Moves? (Knoll 2012:155), and those that prescribe a specific order and direction to romantic relationships, such as ?4 Talks You Should Have Had with Him by Now? (Davies 2012:118), means that readers constantly encounter the message that there is a single correct way to go about sex and relationships, and that they are not currently meeting the standard. Women are thus encouraged to turn to the so-called ?experts,? often authors of pop psychology and self-help books, who are called on by the magazines to ?provide advice and insights into the mysterious workings of the ?opposite sex?? and whose findings are supplemented by polls of men and the opinions of individual men (Farvid and Braun 2006:303). Romantic relationships are difficult, according to women?s magazines, because women must constantly combat men?s natural sexual drive and inclination to cheat by ensuring they are sexually satisfied while simultaneously ensuring the relationship follows a specific progression. Yet across the board, little mention is ever made of variation in sexual preference (all sex tips are presented as applicable to anyone and everyone, regardless of which acts individuals find pleasurable) and romantic relationships are presented as a uniform entity: unchanging in their form despite the differences in individuals involved in them.
Cosmopolitan cover, August 2012.
Women?s magazines build upon cultural assumptions that men and women are fundamentally different in their sexual desires in order to promote the idea that women cannot understand men?s motivations without the aid of experts and testimony from men themselves. As the differences between men?s and women?s romantic behavior is represented as a natural or biological distinction, the pseudo-scientific research and opinion polls that magazines provide can appear to be helpful evidence about the true nature of men?s desires. And because both societal gender expectations and magazines tell women that they should seek long-term monogamous relationships, the messages they take from such magazines about how one must conduct sexual and romantic encounters with men are very important. As the model of correct behavior is so specific, and new information is constantly being presented by ?experts,? women must repeatedly turn to magazines to learn how to properly conduct themselves in romantic and sexual experiences. This reliance on expert opinions is supported by the fact that women?s magazines largely fail to encourage open communication between sexual and romantic partners and even actively promote the idea that honest communication about sex can damage the ego of the male partner. Ultimately, it will never be in the interest of women?s magazines to promote communication between partners as an alternative to their advice because they have built a reputation as esteemed sources of insight into the other gender and their survival as an institution is dependent upon preserving that status.
?
References
Aiello, Josh. 2012. ?What Men Think.? Glamour, August 2012, pp. 98-101.
Bielay, George and Edward S. Herold. 1995. ?Popular Magazines as a Source of Sexual Information for University Women.? The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 4(4):247-262.
Daly, Annie, Anna Davies, Casey Gueren, and Brittany Talarico. 2012. ?101 Things About Men.? Cosmopolitan, August 2012, pp. 104-109.
Davies, Anna. 2012. ?4 Talks You Should Have Had by Now.? Cosmopolitan, August 2012, pp. 118.
Dobransky, Paul. 2012. ?Why Are We So into Heroes?? Cosmopolitan, August 2012, pp. 24.
Farvid, Pante? and Virginia Braun. 2006. ??Most of Us Guys are Raring to Go Anytime, Anyplace, Anywhere?: Male and Female Sexuality in Cleo and Cosmo.? Sex Roles 55(5/6):295-310.
Kim, Janna L. and L. Monique Ward. 2004. ?Pleasure Reading: Associations between Young Women?s Sexual Attitudes and Their Reading of Contemporary Women?s Magazines.? Psychology of Women Quarterly 28(1):48-58.
Knoll, Jessica. 2012. ?52 Sex Tips: Wow Your Man with These Moves Inspired by Fifty Shades of Grey.? Cosmopolitan, August 2012, pp. 155.
Tiefer, Leonore. 2004. Sex Is Not a Natural Act. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
shameless kwame brown martin luther king day blue ivy devil inside dash diet how to make moonshine
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.