Response: A Relation Based on Need

It’s no secret that Douglas’ first three chapters focused on television series and its influence in conveying messages with embedded sexism and enlightened sexism. I found her analysis of these forms of media very interesting, especially her comparison of viewers as voyeurs. These viewers gain pleasure and satisfaction from watching characters of shows like 91210, or perhaps a more contemporary example – Gossip Girl – indulges in sexual promiscuity, social approval from both sexes, and consumerism to gain happiness. Douglas dissects the most popular television shows to reveal traces of enlightened sexism.

But what really got me thinking was how the media seems to perpetuate a sense of need from its consumers. Douglas brought up a great point – how magazines seemed to break down the reader’s self-esteem until they’re desperate for approval and consolation. From the advertisements of models probably in size -1 clothing to tips on how to get a certain celebrity’s butt, or thighs, or face. These magazines sell women images and convince them that this image is essential. After breaking this self-esteem down, the magazine tries to formulate its outside perception of itself to be a source of consolation and a place that understands and will help. The magazine helps with the aforementioned tips on physical body, helps with makeup and hair tips, with even with empowering statements that are very convincing. However, even the horoscope advices tend to include help on how to get the hot guy.

This strategy of breaking down women’s self-esteem and acting as a place to build it back up is what’s creating this sense of need for this type of mediaI personally relate this system to a current social dilemma involving drug dealers and pimps. Once one is addicted to drugs, the pimp is free to utilize this relationship of need to exploit the man, woman, or child. The drug dealer is the media.

Perhaps this comparison is too harsh, but I think that our society today tends to tone things down to the point where we muffle reality – and for what end, for who’s benefit? Deploying euphemisms doesn’t benefit the ones who are suffering. We tend to characterize schools with a small percentage of Whites to be “diverse”, even if the school is over 50% one race, whether it be Blacks, Latinos, or Asians. This is masking the issue that segregation is still apparent. Likewise, if we continue to use euphemisms when we talk about feminism, no one will take it seriously. Though Douglas is very articulate and is obviously passionate about what she has to say, Rebecca Walker’s tone and her brutally honest writing moved me. I wanted to applaud her. She stated the obvious that needed to be stated. Yes, we don’t like to think about our senators being sexist and ill-mannered, but that is the ugly truth and I want to see the ugly truth being revealed, dissected and seen for what it is, even if it makes people uncomfortable. Change isn’t supposed to feel comfortable and with embedded sexism in things we, as a society, are exposed to daily, it is more important than ever to reveal this injustice.

What Baumgardner and Richards calls for is right – we need to embrace autokeonomy. It’s not just a woman’s fight. As engrained as individualism is in our society, we need to be thinking more in terms of a community. Once that happens, the grounds for change will be set.