Short Response to 11/2 Readings

All four of the assigned readings clearly emphasized the disadvantages women must face in the work place. In "The Mommy Tax", Crittenden describes how much money mothers end up losing in their lifetime due to their decision to have children. Having to work part-time, these women are often either laid off or paid less than they were prior to their pregnancy. I was astounded by the fact that the US is one of only six countries in the world that does not require a paid maternity leave and that only eight states have laws prohibiting discrimination against parents in the workplace. In a nation of supposed freedom and opportunity, I am extremely surprised by the fact that we are one of only a few countries that doesn't try to support its working mothers. Women are instead, told to "be a man", to finish school, find a job, and put off children until the very last minute; however biologically this strategy has been found to be very harmful to women who hope to have kids at some point. This article really reminded me of an episode I watched recently of Desperate Housewives (a show about five or six women who live in the sububs). I don't really watch the show but in this episode, one of the main women was on hard financial times with her husband and she made the decision to earn some extra money by making sexually suggestive movies of herself for a company that streamed the videos to men mainly abroad. She was able to earn money by turning herself into a sexual object; however about half way through the episode one of her friends finds out what she is doing and confronts her about it. She responds by defending herself as having no other options which really got me (and apparently her friend as well) to think about what a woman is supposed to do in a situation when she is used to having the money to feed he family but suddenly is unable to.



In "Maid to Order", Ehenreich describes how we are turning into a country in which those women and families in the upper-middle and upper classes are no longer doing their own cleaning and instead are hiring poor, lower-class women to do it for them. Ehenreich points out that these maids are not treated much better than slaves or servants and are often not actually given fair wages let alone health insurance or pension plans. This article made me think about my family's "cleaning lady", Maria. She has been cleaning our house since we moved to Los Angeles over 10 years ago and I really feel like she is part of the family. She moved to the United States and moved in as a stay-at-home nanny for our good family friends over 30 years ago and uses the money she earns cleaning our house every Saturday to go on cool vacations to places like China and India. I realize Maria is the exception and not the rule; however I thought that Ehrenreich was somewhat exaggerating when she said that having a cleaning woman teaches children that some people are better than others. Although I do believe it is an issue that all of these maids are female instead of a mix between men and women, I also think that in our current economic status with such a high level of unemployment, not all housekeeping jobs should be viewed as evil.

Summary of 11/2 Readings

In the chapter "the Mommy Tax," Crittenden explores the economic consequences of becoming a mother.  Studies have shown that the most disadvantaged people in the workplace are women with children.  Mothers earn much less than childless women.  This reduction in wages is termed the 'mommy tax' and is typically greater than one million dollars for college-educated women.  Crittenden talks of her own personal experience.  After her son was born, she took some time off from her job at the New York Times.  Because of this break, she did not recieve pension and lost 50-60 thousand dollars per year.  She ultimately gave up almost half of her life earnings just because she wanted to spend some time with her newborn son.  In middle-class families, the mommy tax will likely be above 600,000 dollars.  In lower-income families, having a child can push the family into poverty.  Taking care of elderly family members has a similar effect on one's annual salary.  Caretakers lose a good deal of money because they take off time to help care for elderly family members. 
Crittenden also cites the example of Virigina Daley.  Daley was fired from her job as an interior designer after she had a baby and attemped to create a more flexible schedule.  She sued her company, Aetna, but lost the case.  It seemed that the jury thought Daley had 'overextended' herself and it was too much to ask from her to raise kids and have a professional career. 
Furthermore, women still do not earn as much as men.  Women earn about 60 cents to every dollar a man makes; a biblical ratio found when God talks to Moses about the Israelites.  Many people believe this is no longer true.  And its not accurate in the case of single, young, childless white women.  But if all women are taken into account, this ratio still holds true. 
Mothers do not only earn less than men but they also earn less than childless women.  Women without children make 90% of men's wages while mothers only earn 70% of men's wages.  This disparity is mind-boggling and research has been undertaken to attempt to discover why mothers earn so much less.  Several possible reasons include the fact that American mothers will quit their jobs as they don't get paid maternity leave.  Employees are penalized for 'job interruptions' and thus when a mother has to take time off to care for a child, she will be penalized.  Mothers also cannot typically work the mandatory overtime hours as they have to be home to care for their children.  This can lead to layoffs or decreased wages.  Also many mothers work part-time and are consequently paid less than full-time workers as employers believe part-time workers do not work as hard.  This is seldomly true.  Many mothers also own their own businesses so that they can have flexibility.  However, these small businesses don't recieve as much aid or capital as men who start their own businesses. 
Fathers who help take care of their children also earn less than men who either have wives who stay at home or are childless.  This is called the 'daddy tax.' 
Crittenden also cites the example of Cindy DiBiasi.  DiBiasi was a reporter who worked extremely hard and was very successful.  She became pregnant however she used her pregnancy to help her move forward, allowing the news crew to film her progress and the birth of her child.  However, when she got pregnant a second time, she was unable to keep up with her previous schedule and tried to create more flexibility.  She was met with hostility from her employers.  She was demoted and put into a job that was feasibly impossible with her schedule.  She ended up having to quit.  This story demonstrated how having two children can be extremely incompatible with women's careers. 
Sometimes the mommy tax can be lowered if women have children later in life.  Once their careers are established and secure, having children will not be impractible or incompatible with careers.  However, the risk with this is waiting too long and then being unable to have children.  The government should also give more aid to mothers. Other countries, such as France, have amazing programs and financial aid which allows mothers to not necessarily pay the 'mommy tax.'  The USA does not do this however they do something similar for veterans, giving boat loads of aids to veterans even if they only served in peacetime.   

In the article "Maid to Order," Ehrenreich talks about maids in the United States.  Cleaning jobs such as the ones that maids are employed to do are seen as subservient.  Being on one's hands and knees immediately evokes an image of a servant or a lesser being.  Earlier in the feminist movements, housework was supposed to be an equalizer.  It was supposed to provide more work for women.  However, no one considered the fact that men were the 'domestic exploiters' of housework.  Wives cleaned up after their husbands.  Housework defined bonds between husbands and wives.  Soon, in order to avoid fights between spouses, maids were hired.  This was seen as a way to provide more work for women.  It was seen as a positive.  However, housework is degrading.  Housework is deeply ingrained in degrading relationships and work to reinforce them.  Furthermore, when men are the ones being cleaned up after and women are the ones doing the clearning up, this creates a way to reinforce and continue male domination and power. 
Most maids hired are women of color and of the lower-class.  Most maids are independent 'free-lancers' instead of working for corporations such as "Merry Maids."  Maids are paid well below the poverty line.  Furthermore, some maids are treated as slaves as they are not regularly paid and work incredibly long hours. 
Recently there has been a rise in corporate cleaning services over independent maids.  Instead of having one maid come in everytime, three or four people would come in uniform with one of them being the designated 'boss' who would speak with the employers.  However, employees in the corporate cleaning services can be majorly screwed over.  They can get paid even less than an independent worker as the corporations will dock their wages on imperfect attendance etc.  Furthermore, cleaning the house becomes more of a factory-like process.  The same method is employed everytime.  The rooms are cleaned in a certain order adn in a certain way.  Furthermore, the main necessity is speed and thus the houses are not necessarily being 'cleaned.'  Instead they are made to look like they are clean when in reality, germs have been spread and nothing has been actually sanitized.  As society continues to build bigger houses and have services for more and more things, the percentage of homes that have a maid will increase.  This will perpetuate class hierachies.  Servility of colored women or lower-class women will persist as they will be the ones continuing to clean the home while the typically white women who hire them will be off doing 'better thigns' with their time. 

In 'Reality Check' by Hakin-Dyce, she talks of her experience as a poor college student fighting to make enough money to survive.  Although she had a great education and seemed to be a powerful and active student, she was unable to find a job and had to consider demeaning work as a go-go dancer.  Miraculously, she was offered a job as an English tutor the day of her audition for go-go dancing and thus never had to commit such demeaning acts.  The article stresses how many poor and working-class people, however, are not miraculously saved.  They have to face sexually demeaning and degrading work just to survive.  There are no alternatives.  Although they are able to make money through these jobs, it costs them something important.  These women have to sacrifice somethign daily when they go to their jobs.  As Hakin-Dyce says, she came so "close to shutting off a part of who I am, that part of me that is spontaneous, creative, open and empowered" because she almost became a go-go dancer. 

In "Knowledge is Power," Maria Cristina Rangel writes of her experience as a beneficiary of welfare, as a mother of two, and as a full-time student.  Rangel begins by noting that poverty is not somethign one chooses.  It is not something that is one's own fault.  No one wants to be in that position.  No one wants to be helpless, money-less, dependent on the government.  She has tried everything she could.  She has thought ahead yet it still is not enough.  Getting out of poverty is nearly impossible in this country.  Rangel moved to Massachusetts in 1996 and she recieved a TAFDC which allowed her to attend Smith.  She recieved some benefits although it was not enough to fully feed her children or provide consistent daycare.  She had to continually report to a caseworker to show that she was still tryign to find a job etc.  This was particularly demeaning because OF COURSE she was working to find a job and working to make her situation better.  But in this country, it is so hard to do and most people are unable to come out of poverty.  Rangel ultimately became a member of Welfare, Education, Training and Access Coalition to spread awareness and help others in similar situations.  She talks of the inadequacy of government welfare and benefits.  These need to be raised.  The country cannot continue to ignore the class problems and huge discrepancies. 

Media Culture Project: Who Skyy Vodka Advertisements Are Really Selling To

As exhibited by the three above magazine advertisements, Skyy Vodka clearly sexually objectifies women in order to appeal to their male clientele; however it is interesting to note that these ads are aimed at women as well. By portraying women as sexually desirable, Skyy is selling the supposed power that comes with controlling the male sex’s attractions. Although all three of these women are depicted as happy and confident, it is clear this confidence comes from their physical beauty. Skyy vodka’s advertisements are a clear example of portraying the illusion of women’s power and control over men through sexual appeal and objectification of women’s own bodies. Advertisements such as these illustrate the media’s influence on our acceptance of portraying females as sexual objects. Instead of being angered by these blatantly sexist representations of women, we seem to embrace them under the assumption that they are an exaggeration and therefore untrue portrayals of modern women. These advertisements are clearly aimed at both men and women; however only the females are sexually objectified in the pictures while the men’s faces are not even shown.

Douglas explains that the media gives us the illusion of women’s modern day success through pointing out the women in high level positions as lawyers, CEOs and politicians. These “fantasies of power” however, “assure girls and women, repeatedly, that women’s liberation is a fait accompli and that we are stronger, more successful, more sexually in control, more fearless, and more held in awe than we actually are” (Douglas 5). This illusion of female advancement, Douglas argues, makes it acceptable to portray women in this sexualized way because feminism is dead and no longer necessary. Women are now equal to men and therefore they should actually utilize their sexual appeal to further their gain of control and power in the world. At first glance, these advertisements are clearly an example of the sexual objectification of women; however this myth of female power serves as justification of the ads being acceptable and successful in our society.

All three advertisements show a woman’s face and part or all of her body interacting flirtatiously with a faceless man. Skyy vodka is undoubtedly shown in all of the ads; however the primary focus of the pictures is the sexually charged interaction between the man and woman. In ad #1, the woman is standing in a seemingly powerful stance over the hidden man sitting in a chair in front of her. It appears as though he is either toasting to her or holding his glass out for more; however either action gives the illusion of the woman’s power over the man. What you might not immediately notice in the picture is that the straw in the martini glass on the table is pointing to the Skyy Vodka while the straw in the man’s glass is aimed at the woman’s crotch. These subliminal messages are not always noticed by the viewer; however they clearly influence the impact of the image. Although the ad tries to show the woman’s asserted power, she is dressed in a very revealing backless long black dress with excessive cleavage and an extremely high slit up the side of her leg facing us. She is clearly thin and has the body Douglas describes as Pamela Anderson’s breasts on a 12 year old boy’s body. Ad #2 has many similarities to the first ad; however the sexual interaction between the two characters is even more pronounced. The man stands sexually over the half-naked woman while holding two martini glasses and a full bottle of Skyy Vodka. The large-breasted woman appears to be peeling her sunglasses off of her face as she contemplates giving the man her attention. Although it seems as though the woman has the ability to choose whether or not she wants to continue interacting with the man, he is standing in a very aggressive stance while straddling her. While the ad doesn’t explicitly show violence toward the woman, the man’s natural physical size and position in relation to the woman implies the man’s control. The third advertisement is also very similar to the first two in its portrayal of the two characters; however the man is serving the woman as opposed ad #1. The female figure is seductively opening her mouth to receive the fruit the male is feeding her. Her large breasts are blatantly shown in the attempt to attract the man sitting across from her and the ocean in the background helps to portray as this interaction as blissful and utopian. All three ads, however, clearly show the sexuality of the woman’s face and body and yet none reveal the man’s face.

The faceless man in all three of these ads could be replaced by anyone viewing the image, serving to universalize the ad to everyone. This “male gaze” puts the viewer in the position of the man when looking at the picture, further contributing to the message that Skyy Vodka brings the consumer power. Enlightened sexism explains that “through women’s calculated deployment of their faces, bodies, attire, and sexuality that they gain and enjoy true power” (Douglas 10). These pictures advertise power to both women and men. Men want the power to attract these beautiful women while women in turn want the power that supposedly comes with this impossible body. Since both the men and the women are holding the drinks, these images advertise power and happiness to both men and women through the acquisition and consumption of the vodka.

All three of the settings of the images are ideal and picturesque, insinuating that happiness comes along with the vodka as well. In ad #1, the man and woman are in a large, beautiful, expensive apartment overlooking a bright lit up city at night while ads #2 and #3 are set on a beach, suggesting an idyllic vacation. Douglas describes how “under the guise of escapism and pleasure, we are getting images of imagined power that mask, and even erase, how much still remains to be done for girls and women, images that make sexism seem fine, even fun, and insist that feminism is not utterly pointless” (Douglas 6). Both men and women view this advertisement and feel like Skyy is offering them power and influence. Since the media tells us that women are now equal to men in today’s society, there is no apparent problem with portraying women in such an openly sexual manner. We are told that women should be allowed to utilize their sexual appeal to increase their influence in the world just as men often use their strength and masculinity. Hyper-femininity is viewed as completely acceptable because it is simply taking the power men give us and extending it into all aspects of our lives.

As these ads show, women are told that what they really want is to attract men. Enlightened sexism tells us that women can finally fulfill this desire because we have proven ourselves as equal to men in every other aspect of our lives. Although these ads portray both the men and women as powerful characters, the females are only able to gain this influence over men through their sexual appeal while the un-pictured men are clearly able to have this control without the necessity of physical attractiveness since their faces are not even shown. As Douglas explains, “it’s through sex and sexual display that women really have the power to get what they want” (Douglas 156) and these advertisements clearly support this notion. Since the women are only able to gain power through sexually asserting themselves over the men, this supposed power is in actuality nothing more than a fantasy. The media has shifted our perceptions of women’s equality in today’s society resulting in the increased objectification of women throughout the media. The illusion of women’s equality has made it acceptable to make women into female sex symbols and “it’s actually a joke on the guys (Douglas 13).

The rise of the sexpert, a female sex whiz, originally came from the desires of young women for sexual freedom and the ability to enjoy sex without judgment. The sexpert, however, emphasizes that the goal of the female life is to get men to lust after you while getting other women to envy you (Douglas 10). By representing women in a hyper-sexualized manner, females’ power is actually belittled and minimized to solely sexuality and beauty. This illusion of female power and equality is actually hindering the advancement of women in modern society instead of helping it. These faceless men could be any man the female viewer imagines, giving further credibility to the illusion of women’s power. The contentedness that has arisen surrounding feminist groups due to these fantasies of power has resulted in a common perception of feminism itself being sexist. Since feminism stereotypes certain women and denies them their full range of opportunities, many people disregard it as being an unnecessary movement in a society where men and women already are actually equal and any attention drawn to inequalities is actually a backwards movement in women’s fight for equality.

Women are buying into the idea that Skyy Vodka will make them more attractive to men while men are buying the vodka that will in turn attract these beautiful women. The real message of the ads, however, is that the women are merely objects to be bought and sold the same way Skyy vodka is. The subliminal messages that accompany these advertisements, including the direction of the pointing straw in Ad #1, clearly show that the ads are not simply selling vodka. According to Douglas, advertisements send the message that “your body is your central, crucial resource in establishing your net worth as a female” (Douglas 216). The perfection associated with these women’s bodies insinuates that Skyy vodka is also a form of perfection. Enlightened feminism reconfigures antifeminism as feminism by emphasizing women’s false impression of their status and power in society.

Skyy advertisements are a clear example of Douglas’s theory of enlightened sexism and its role in shaping both men and women’s perception of the female in modern society. By telling us women have already achieved equality in all or almost all aspects of life, the media opens the door to advertisers overly sexually objectifying females as shown in these three ads. These advertisements appeal to both sexes because of the promise of power that both sexes desire. Only the women, however, are overtly sexualized while it is clearly men who have the true control in today’s society.

Media Culture Project: Female Sexual Objectification in Dolce and Gabbana Advertisement

Dolce & Gabbana, an Italian designer company, released an advertisement in 2008 that stunned viewers due to its provocative and extremely sexist images.  The advertisement portrays a scantily clad woman being held down by a half naked man, while four other men stand nearby watching.  The image denotes that objectifying women as sexual objects is acceptable, that men should have all the power and control in relationships and society, and that men want a certain physical type of woman.  These themes and images work to police women’s sexuality and thus keep them from being threats to male dominance and male sexuality.

The Dolce and Gabbana advertisement blatantly denotes that women are sexual objects by placing the female model in such a compromising position.  Since the 1990s, there has been an unbridled return to sexually objectifying women.  Women are told that their sole merit is their sex appeal and they are simply things for men to use as they please. Society views and places woman in such demeaning manners in order to prevent total sexual justice as female sexuality is seen as threatening.  Furthermore, as Susan Douglas notes in Enlightened Sexism, society constantly conveys that female power can be achieved through sex and sexual exhibitions.  The preeminent way to gain authority and influence is to gratify and cater to what men desire.  Women are told that they should enthusiastically select and rejoice being sexual objects.  Thus, women accept and actually welcome the role of a ‘sexual object’ as they believe it will ultimately empower them.  A woman’s main advantage or skill, therefore, becomes being able to ‘strut her stuff.’  Catering to men’s desires through high heels and short skirts and buying into male sexual fantasies become a source of power.  Yet, in all actuality, it is not a source of power.  It is demeaning and ultimately, it is a way to keep women in their place.  As sexual objects, they are viewed as mindless and idiotic.  They cater to men and not to their own desires.  Thus, their sexuality is kept in check and cannot threaten male dominance and male sexuality.  By diminishing women to their sexuality, it damages their campaign for full equality.  Women become less than people (Douglas 154-187).  Curtis Sittenfeld in ‘Your Life as a Girl’ comments on this phenomenon, saying “you wear spandex shorts that make you feel like your legs are pieces of sausage…Men stick their heads out windows of their cars and hoot at you…then you realize that they aren’t seeing you, not as a person.  They are seeing you as long hair and bare legs, and you are frightened” (Sittenfeld 6).  A fear factor is created, working to keep women frightened of men and thus, keeping them in their place.  This fear becomes a part of being a woman as Emilie Morgan remarks in ‘Don’t Call Me a Survivor’, saying “I am not sure which was harder: being gang-raped, or having the sudden realization that this is what it means to be a woman” (Morgan 36).  Sexual objectification and violence harness women’s sexuality and ultimately keep women from being threats to male dominance and sexuality. 

The designer advertisement also implies that men should have all the power and control in relationships and society by having one of the men stand over the woman and hold her down, while the other men look on menacingly.  Female power is seen as a very threatening and real issue in society.  Douglas points out that people believe that women will lose control or go ‘wild’ if feminism and women gain power.  She cites three different cases: Lorena Bobbitt, Tonya Harding, and Amy Fisher.  Each of these cases demonstrates the result of female empowerment as violent and terrifying.  The media used such rare cases of female aggression to incite the necessity of harnessing female power and sexuality.  The media issued out the message that men need to remain in control; the patriarchy must be maintained.  Otherwise, there will be disastrous consequences.  Janet Reno is another common example used to keep women from seeking empowerment.  Reno was a powerful woman who occupied a traditionally male role.  She refused to act ‘feminine’ and cater to her gender role and thus, was perceived as a threat.  The media reduced Reno to her sexuality and made her out to be a massive joke.  She became a regulating device for other women, showing them what would happen if they acted out of place or tried to gain power.  Gains in political or societal success will result in steep costs to personal status.  Any woman who acts out of place will be controlled, either by the media or society (Douglas 54-75).  Sittenfeld cites a personal example, saying “you cannot hear everything they say, but you make out your name and the word ‘nagging.’  You have overstepped your boundaries, and they have put you in your place” (Sittenfeld 10).  Thus, this advertisement also works as a regulating device, by visually showing women that men are in power and have control over women. 

The advertisement also paints a picture of what the ideal woman should look like.  The woman in the ad is clad in tight, body-hugging black spandex that is shaped like a bathing suit, hugging her crotch and revealing her long, naked legs.  She has extremely high, pointy heels on, boatloads of makeup, and tan skin.  She is tall, extremely slender and although her cup-size is not evident, one can guess that she has fairly big breasts.  According to the ad, this is the ideal woman.  This is what men want.  Yet, this body type is rarely found in nature.  Very few women fit the profile of a ‘lanky twelve year old boy with Pamela Anderson’s breasts” (Douglas 217).  Thus, the media ultimately tells most women their bodies are not normal or attractive unless they meet these standards.  Such unrealistic expectations result in eating disorders, low self-esteem, and low self-confidence.  It becomes impossible for a woman to be satisfied with her body.  This lack of satisfaction actually is used to financially benefit corporations.  The policing of women’s bodies results in women spending all sorts of money in order to make their bodies ‘ideal.’  Thus, the ideal body is about capitalism as corporations (pharmaceutical, cosmetic, film companies etc.) ultimately benefit.  This image also gives one meaning to ‘sexy.’  It tells women if they want to be sexual and desired, they have to look exactly like the woman in the ad.  By giving a concrete and bounded definition of ‘sexy,’ female sexuality is again policed.  The creation of an ideal woman that is inaccessible to most women serves as a regulating device.  Joan Brumberg writes that “[young women], their self-esteem began to have more to do with external attributes than with inner qualities, such as strength of character or generosity of spirit” (Body Projects 101).  Women start to judge or rank themselves in regards to an unreachable physical body image.  Thus, they can never be really happy or satisfied.  They will never be perfect or good enough.  This keeps women from gaining personal empowerment and confidence.  It works to control female power and thus keep patriarchal society and masculine prerogatives safe (Douglas 214-241). 

The Dolce and Gabbana advertisement is ultimately a way to police and regulate female power.  By sexually objectifying the woman and putting her in a submissive position, the ad harnesses female sexuality and implies the necessity of male dominance.  Images such as this one are seen all over the media.  These repetitive themes work to embed and engrain certain ideas into society so that they are not questioned or overturned.  These ideas include the danger of female sexuality, a celebration of female sexual objectification, and what it means to be sexy as a female.  Women become so focused and obsessed with fitting these unattainable ideals that they end up losing confidence and personal conviction.  Women also focus on only pleasing men and do not take into consideration their own sexual desires.  They see sexual objectification as empowering and thus work to satisfy men and not themselves.  Thus, women play a part in keeping themselves in a submissive position.  They play into the patriarchy of society and are a huge reason of why it is still maintained.  As Allan Johnson says, patriarchy is not all about men.  Everyone participates in the system.  Women support and buy into stereotypes and constantly follow paths of least resistance.  Until the entire system is questioned by both men and women, society will continue to think and run in a sexually unequal manner (Johnson).

References

Douglas, Susan.  Enlightened Sexism.  Times Book, 2010.

Findlen, Barbara, ed.  Listen Up:  Voices from the Next Feminist Generation, New Expanded

Edition.  Seal Press, 2001. 

Johnson, Allan G.  The Gender Knot.  “Patriarchy the System: An It, Not a He, a Them, or an

Us.”  Temple University Press: Philadelphia, 1997.

Morgan, Emilie.  “Don’t Call Me a Survivor.” Listen Up: Voice from the Next Feminist

Generation.  Ed. Barbara Findlen.  Seal Press, 2001. PAGES

Sittenfeld, Curtis.  “Your Life as a Girl.” Listen Up: Voice from the Next Feminist Generation.

Ed. Barbara Findlen.  Seal Press, 2001. PAGES

Response to 10/26 Readings

After reading Enloe's two chapters on third-world female labor, I agree with all of what Maria said about how the companies' slogans seem very hypocritical to me. At one point in the reading, Enloe pointed out the Reebok gave out humanitarian awards every year but did not even have their own human rights protection system in place. I have actually read about Nike's horrible treatment of their factory workers in 3rd world countries; however i never really thought about how they rely on the societies' social structures to require women to move to the cities and work prior to marriage. I had always just assumed that the workers in the factories were those who coudn't find a job anywhere else and the fact that many of them were female was simply attributed to the fact that women had a harder time finding work elsewhere. The fact that the companies organizing dating mixers to introduce the women to eligible men to marry really mad me mad. Companies like Nike and Reebok rely on the expectation that women in these countries like China and Thailand fulfill their duties as daughters and go to earn some money for their families. Living in America, we don't usually think about the fact that in other countries it is expected that girls go and work in order to help their family pay for their BROTHERS' education while the females remain uneducated and overworked. I found an interesting website that provides "facts" (I'm not sure how accurate they are) regarding Nike's treatment of its factory workers. A few of these facts include accusations that an Indonesian Nike factory worker claims he has to work over 40 hours a week OVERTIME in order to not starve. Also, the website claims that we pay over $100 for a pair of shoes that costs $5. Although some of these statistics could possibly be slightly exaggerated, the general point is clear. Nike mistreats its factory workers to an extremely unhealthy extent and yet nothing is done about it because as Enloe points out, Nike will just move to the country next door if the government or people try to fight the system too much. Interestingly enough, however, Nike's own website clearly lists out how they work hard to constantly improve the conditions of their factories. Companies like Nike and Reebok might try to publicize their attempts at improving their factory conditions in order to improve their public image but drastic steps need to be taken in order to put an end to the mis-treatment of factory workers in all industries in 3rd world countries.

Response to 10/26 Readings

After reading the two chapters from Cythia Enloe's book, my love of all Nike, Reebok (etc.) products has immensely diminished.  I have always loveeeed their commercials.  Nike commercials, especially, set a high bar for sports commercials.  They make ads that are inspiring, creative, and emotionally manipulative.  For instance, Nike's Michael Jordan commercial targets atheletes and non-athletes alike and sends a deep message that success cannot be achieved without some failures.  Thus, failing is okay.  All their commercials speak of freedom, success, emotion, drive, and inspiration.  Yet, all of their success is riding on the backs of a hopeless and depressing class of women factory workers.  The hypocrisy of these companies is disgusting and disappointing.  You think that finally the world is making huge strides towards equality and fairness and then you hear about something like this.  Fellow women are miles behind where American women were decades ago.  How different parts of the world could lack such equality is astounding.  Sometimes I feel like I'm in a bubble.  None of these facts are routinely publicized.  Society is 'protected' from these painful images and corporations are 'protected' from being criticized due to their influence and wealth. 
Enloe also speaks about how these corporations keep the women workers from protesting for more money and more rights.  They publicize and idealize a certain type of feminism: a daughter and fiancee who must make money to save for her family and marriage.  Also, many times a military presence at the factories keep women from voicing their real opinions.  I found this video on the "happiness" of female textile workers in the Democratic Republic of Korea. 
Another hard thing is that even if you want to protest against these corporations and not buy their products, what are your other options?  You can buy handmade shoes from local leather shops but that is extremely expensive.  Thus, these corporations will never go out of business.  A protests from the side of the consumer is almost unimaginable.  People are not going to stop shopping at places like Walmart or Starbucks even though they are aware of their use of 'cheap labor.'  Many people need places like Walmart because of its affordable prices.  Thus, even if they wanted to protest and boycott such companies, it may be unfeasible for them.  Here's another video on Walmart's use of Bangladesh workers and the awful conditions they have in the factories. 

10/21 Summary Post

The first of the readings titled “Sex, Lies & Advertising” by Gloria Steinem is a recount of MS Magazine’s attempt to change the traditional imagery in advertisements to combat the media’s attempts at selling sexuality and imperfection. Steinem describes how MS was trying to convince companies to do business in a very new and different way and therefore had to convince advertisers to pay for page space in MS. By targeting everything from car to alcohol companies, MS faced enormous resistance and refusal to comply with their advertising demands. Food companies and restaurants refused to advertise in MS magazine unless the ad was placed next to a recipe that would serve to further entice the reader to buy their products. MS, however, did not want to associate their articles with work or feminine house-wife duties; therefore they refused to conform to the advertisers’ demands. By publishing an article on the potential carcinogenic effects of hair dyes, MS alienated Clairol as a potential advertiser even though the company ended up changing its hair color formula in response. Their attempts to advertise wines and liquors ended up being somewhat successful; however the disproportionate number of alcohol related ads ended up calling into question the association of women and alcoholism. Airlines refused to support a magazine that featured lesbian poetry articles but credit card companies did eventually decide to advertise to women as well as men despite their long term fear of “having a ‘pink’ card”. Although the myth exists that advertisers “simply follow readers”, Steinman points out that it is actually the other way around.

Steinmen continues her article by pointing out that in 1965, Helen Gurley Brown brought the sexual revolution to women’s magazines through ads. Steinmen points out the double standard that many companies operate under: food companies place ads in People with no recipes and cosmetics companies buy ad space in The New Yorker even though there are no beauty columns. This expectation that women’s magazines need to support their advertisers in their articles is what Steinmen is largely arguing against. By the 1920’s, women’s magazines had basically turned into catalogs due to mass manufacturing. This trend has continued through today as companies advertising to women strategically place their products next to or in the hands or traditionally female associated items. Steinbaum ends by suggesting multiple ways that we could change this advertising cycle and ends with questioning us (the reader): “Can’t we do better than this?” Steinbaum urges us to reject magazines such as Cosmo and Vogue (which contribute to the sexualization of women) and instead join in her fight against advertisers.





In her article “The Body Project”, Brumberg chronicles the development of American female body image from the 1920s-1990s. The 1920’s began with fashion and film beginning to “unveil” the female body which resulted in the new freedom to display the body. With this freedom, however, came demanding beauty and dietary habits. Maria showed the progression of the idea female beauty really well in her photographs of women of different decades (see below post). Beginning in the 1920’s, the new fashionable figure was slender, tall and flat-chested, cutting loose from the traditional views of voluptuous beauty. Blumberg argues that as young women began to become more autonomous from their mothers, their self-esteem was more dependent on external attributes rather than inner qualities. It was no longer considered sinful or shallow to be vain, so girls began to focus their conversation around their hair, face and figure. The slinky “flapper” dress of the 1920’s “had begun to blur the distinction between the private and the public self” (107). The rise of the training bra further blurred this distinction and saw the rise of consumerism being aimed at adolescent girls. The transition from homemade bras to mass-produced bras further encouraged autonomy in girls because it took matters of style opinions out of the control of the mothers. The 1950’s witnessed the emphasis on women’s breast size, which promoted a general idea of “junior figure control”, in which mothers and doctors checked to make sure girls were developing correctly. This “budding adolescent body was big business” and these body projects of middle-class girls were becoming more intense as time progressed. The 1990’s witnessed a rise in the fear of “thunder thighs” and everyone began to hate cellulite. Brumberg ends her article discussing how adolescent piercings have become the ultimate representative of the sexual revolution and proclaim the ways in which “exhibitionism and commercial culture have come together”.

In her short article "Ruminations of a Feminist Fitness Instructor", Valdes describes how she originally took a job as an aerobics instructor at a young age and continued through much of her twenties. A self-proclaimed feminist, Valdes had many issues with her job since it tended to focus largely on women's physiques; however she was able to justify these moral dilemmas with telling herself that there was "a great deal of raw, primal energy and force in a room full of women moving together". Although this is true, Valdes eventually quit her job in women's fitness, went back to school (as she had originally planned) and recognized "the famle obsession with thinness and fitness as an extension of the hurt we suffer at the hands of patriarchal society".