Primetime Reimagines Female Power

With the Hunger Games film being released last weekend, I've been thinking about portrayals of "powerful" women in television and film. I put powerful in quotation marks because the powerful women that grace our screens today represent illusions of what female power could or should be but is not in the real world (unfortunately). For example, I was watching the show Fairly Legal on USA. The lead female character is all about helping people and being a lawyer who cares about "justice." She walks around the office barefoot telling men that she can do whatever she wants. Well, I wish I had her job...



This archetype is visible on ABC's new show, Scandal.



In this clip, Kerry Washington's character, Olivia Pope, tells the president of the United States that she doesn't want to help him, and she prevents a shooting with a convincing verbal argument. She is a woman that always gets her way. Her gut tells her what to do, which is an interesting statement, since "female intuition" is constantly undermined and devalued. Women are often too busy fretting about their periods and appearances to be trusted to have any opinions at all. It is also interesting to note that Shonda Rhimes, the creator of Grey's Anatomy, is the mastermind behind this show. Grey's Anatomy, a show that can be viewed as progressive in some ways for its portrayals of successful female professionals, reinforces ideas about beauty and relationships. The doctors are all attractive, sleep together, and their personal dramas constantly prevent them from successfully completing surgeries (If this is true, I'm never going to a hospital!)

The tagline in another promo for Scandal states, "She's the most powerful woman in Washington and no one knows about her." Well, there's a reason why people don't know about her. She doesn't exist. I watch these shows and feel empowered, the same feelings I gained when watching Jennifer Garner kick butt on Alias. It's wonderful to get lost in these reimaginations of female power for a few hours, but how realistic are they given the current climate for women?

Jennifer Lawrence, who I think is a fiesty, intelligent, and cool actress, is either being oversexualized in magazines or criticized for being "big-boned." She makes daring film choices and doesn't seem to care what people think of her, and yet, every magazine I pick up is preoccupied with her love life or imperfect figure.

And where do these messages about female beauty perfection come from? I just saw this ad for Guess featuring Claudia Schiffer still sexy 23 years later. In fact, she has not aged at all.

I'm all about presenting more complex, strong female characters on television, but there's always some kind of catch on these shows. Female power always comes with a price tag, and often it's a lackluster love life for the workaholic female lead. And of course, these women are all young and beautiful since power only belongs to the young and beautiful! So, when I see these promos, I sigh a little because I want to be the women in these shows with limitless power, free from the lower paying jobs, sexual harassment, etc.

Another problematic aspect of these shows is that this illusion of female power creates the illusion that feminism is unnecessary, and women don't have anything to "complain" about anymore. If you've read anything on my blog, you'll realize that feminism is absolutely necessary, so I think these shows also serve as tricks that intelligent viewers should question and challenge.

Is there ever a "good rape scene" in a movie?

A conversation I had a few days ago and this article on tumblr has me thinking again about portrayals of rape, assault, and rough sex in films. As a refresher, I addressed this topic when reviewing the film Unfaithful in a previous post. The article on tumblr discusses the author's disappointment with the rape scene in the American release of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. To be honest, I'm confused about this author's difference between a good and bad rape scene because is there is ever a "good rape scene" in a movie? I understand what she's trying to get at here. Rape is always bad, but the manner in which a director displays or handles the rape in the film gains different reactions from viewers. For example, some rape scenes in films can be confused with rough sex. Rape should get a strong negative reaction from the audience while rough sex should arouse the audience. 


Yet, these lines are so blurry, and I think this ambiguity has contributed to a LOT of debate about what constitutes rape. Portrayals of rape in films normalize violence against women, and more people need to be asking these directors: Is this rape scene essential to this film? Does it contribute to the character's transformation in the film?


I'm torn here because I think rape should be discussed in films, and there may be something beneficial in bringing a realistic portrayal of rape to a wide audience. But, I don't think directors in Hollywood have a woman's dignity and respect in mind when filming these scenes. No, I have not seen The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, but the posters are oversexualized. Rooney Mara isn't wearing a shirt in this image:

Lisabeth is a strong female character, yet in this image she is reduced to a body to look at.  Her rape is an important part of the story, and I don't think it should be left out of the film, but there needs to be more caution when telling rape stories in films. Rape is a serious topic that should be handled with seriousness.

Thank for clarifying this, Ryan!

How do we live in a contradictory world?

While flipping through the recent issue of Marie Claire with Reese Witherspoon on the cover, I was faced with a dilemma. Marie Claire has launched a "What I Love About Me" campaign where women around the country submit entries about the unique flaws and features they love about themselves. The goal is to make women feel confident inside and out. I think this would be a great campaign if the page wasn't situated next to an image of Jessica Alba, advertising for the newest makeup product that will "blow you away." It is also problematic that the best submissions are featured in the magazine. Who determines the flaws that are better than others?


If inner beauty matters so much, then why am I also reading an article in the magazine titled, "Ankles Away. When Samantha Marshall learned that a cosmetic procedure could vanquish her 'cankles,' she stepped right up, dreaming of dainty new ankles in kitten heels. But could it really be that easy?" This article describes a woman's insecurities about her "cankles" and subsequent plastic surgery procedure. This $4,000 to $6,000 procedure gives Marshall "elegant ankles" and her ankles are no longer a source of ridicule from her boyfriend. The cover image for this article is an image of a woman's legs. As I discussed in my previous post, this image has been overdone and makes women into objects.


For a final project last semester, I posed the question: How do we live in a contradictory world? The question came out of my frustration at the mixed messages my favorite magazines promote. Should I love my body or try to "transform" it with makeup, plastic surgery, and a new exercise routine? 


These conflicting messages are present in commercials, such as Sofia Vergara's Pepsi Zero campaign and her Kmart campaign. Check out Vergara's first commercial for Pepsi where she strips off her clothes before reaching the drink stand and the behind the scenes clip for Diet Pepsi's "Skinny" campaign. These commercials are selling the product as well as Vergara's figure. Yet, Vergara's Kmart campaign shares a different message. She advertises for her new line with Kmart by showing her clothes in many body types. She transforms into these women, suggesting that her clothing line is accessible to more women than the usual size two to four population brands like Abercrombie target. Vergara tells her audience to be sexy and proud of who he or she is. Take a look at the commercial and an article discussing the campaign.


The messages in popular magazines and commercials are not all positive or all negative. A woman can wear makeup to enhance her performance while feeling empowered and confident in herself. Women live in this contradictory world by taking what works for them and challenging the messages that don't. I don't want to try the toughest workout in America (No thanks, Marie Claire!), but I do want to check out the magazine's tips for skin care that is safer and more effective.

Sofia Vergara at the 2011 Golden Globes.

(http://www.fashionfame.com/wp-content/uploads/2011

/01/sofia-vergara-2011-golden-globe-awards.jpeg)

What do movie and television posters say about their female leads?

I love watching films and critiquing them. I've been thinking about how movie and television posters portray their female leads. This poster sparked my interest:

In terms of romantic comedies, I think this movie is one of the best ones I've seen in years, so when I saw this poster I was bummed. This image is problematic because Marisa Tomei is reduced to a pair of legs. Steve Carrell is also pigeon-holed into the sex-crazy male with that goofy expression on his face. The "legs as framing" technique is overdone, particularly in hip-hop music videos. For more information on this, you can consult the Media Education Foundation's website and documentary, DreamWorlds. The videos on this site are great for educators to use in their classrooms. They're currently producing a documentary of Jessica Valenti's, The Purity Myth. I read this book last summer. Valenti discusses sex-education in the United States, "purity balls" where young women creepily promise to stay faithful to their fathers before marriage, and she calls into question where this concept of "virginity" came from. Take a look at Valenti's book!

Another promo for a television program that caught my attention:

And:

So "Don't let the name fool you", just judge me based on the slip dress I'm wearing?! What's going on in these pictures? The last one caught my attention because she's not looking at the viewer. While she is powerful and strong, this ad reminds the viewer that she is "feminine" and a woman with the heels and sexy, black dress. There isn't anything wrong with women looking sexy, but there is a problem when she is reduced to that one image. What about these images says that she's strong?

I then looked at this image:

This image fits with many other promos ABC has created. Desperate Housewives was one of the worst offenders with images like this and this. It's playing on an old double-bind that women need to be innocent, as shown with the white clothing, yet sinful and dirty with the slogan "they're not saints." Anyone else notice that while the show tries to incorporate some diversity, they are "whitening" this image. I find that ridiculous! This image will attract male audiences, but I find it problematic and disheartening that these images of women are recycled over and over again. When will this change?

Media education is important in an age where young people and their parents watch on average four hours of television per day. I'm currently reading Catching a Wave: Reclaiming Feminism in the 21st Century edited by Rory Dicker and Alison Piepmeier, and the first chapter begins with a call for media education. I think this starts small by questioning the images that have become so ingrained in our minds that we perceive them as normal. It is not NORMAL that women are portrayed as body parts instead of people.

New Film, A Dangerous Method, Causes Stir

As a psychology nerd, I'm excited about this film. It's based on the true story of Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and his patient Sabina Spielrein. Jung and Sabina begin a sexual relationship, and the film centers around the tension between Freud and Jung. It's a fascinating story. The film's causing some stir for a scene where Jung played by Michael Fassbender spanks Sabina played by Keira Knightley. Why is that necessary? Are the minds behind the film over-sexualizing Keira so more people will watch?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040739/Keira-Knightley-

A-Dangerous-Method-Sex-spanking-bitter-feud.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Funny or Offensive? You Decide.

(http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1/headlines/2011/06/

justin-timberlake-mila-kunis-mtv-movie-awards-2011.jpg)

Take a moment to consider what's going on in this picture... I was confused at first until I found this link. At the MTV Movie Awards, presenters, Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake shared with the audience that they have "never dated, are just friends, and are like brother and sister." This sibling relationship was demonstrated by touching each other on stage. 


Okay, I would NEVER do that to my brother. I don't think it's funny to do that in front of a live audience, and really Justin was it necessary to comment about the size of your penis afterward? Now that I'm processing this image, I am uncomfortable with it and the thought that young children were probably watching this show. I LOVE Mila Kunis, and I respect her for publicly speaking about her struggles to be a successful woman in the television and movie industries. Yet, there are aspects of her image that frustrate me. Is she a woman comfortable with her sexuality or is she putting on a show for her male fans? I think it's interesting that we read about celebrities' personal lives and view them in films and feel as if we know them. It is kind of creepy now that I think about it. You decide.

Are Men Under Attack?

I've noticed that men are getting a lot of bad publicity in the media sphere over the last few weeks/years. When I returned home from Connecticut, my mother left an article on my bed from the Wall Street Journal, with the harsh title, "Where Have All the Good Guys Gone?" It featured an excerpt from a book released this past March titled, Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men into Boys, by Kay Hymowitz. She analyzes how pop culture has created the infamous "man-boy", a.k.a Seth Rogan before he meets Katherine Heigel in Knocked Up. One immediate issue I have with this book is the fact that women are being blamed for the rise of "man-boys." Why must women be punished for their power and strength? Female power poses a threat to men who are now losing their masculinity and never growing up. This is a troubling connection to me.


I was then sent to an amusing video from The Onion titled, "Obama Releases 500,000 Men from U.S. Strategic Bachelor Reserve." While I think the video's hilarious, there were certain parts that made me a bit uncomfortable. For example, the ideal man, according to The Onion, notices a woman's new haircut and learns to grow a vegetable garden. Is that all women desire in a life partner?


My main question is: Are The Onion, Knocked Up, and Kay Hymowitz onto something? Is this generation of men, less mature, and more boyish? I'm certainly not an authority on the male population, and I've had my fair share of awkward experiences with immature men (for evidence of this, you can refer to this previous post). Yet, I do have an opinion on this "man-boy" phenomena. I think films such as Knocked Up have glorified the "man-boy" archetype and made it more socially acceptable for men to sit around in their pajamas and play video games all day. Why grow up when your favorite celebrity stays a child forever in your favorite television program or movie? I think it gives men "the easy way out" and an excuse to avoid responsibilities in their lives, so let's get rid of the "man-boy" term. Also, it's an exaggeration to say that all men are like this. I'd like to keep the hope alive that there are "good" men out there, escaping the "man-boy" label.

"Man-boys" in action.

(http://www.universalstudiosentertainment.com/uploads/

ku_wall_1280x1024_5-1.jpg)

Why are women expected to be Superheroes?

As a senior in college, I am reaching a point where I have to make some decisions about my future. I don't think I need to have a plan for the rest of my life, but I know that now is when I should be thinking: What's next? As I've considered this question frequently over the past few months, I've discovered how complicated it is particularly for women to decide on career paths. While this is a long way down the line (at least for me), I have to ask myself: When does a family fit into my life plans? That question affects job plans and grad school plans.

I noticed that dilemma during a conversation with one of the women that lives on my street while I was waiting for my brother at the bus stop. She was asking me about my plans after college. I remarked that "I wasn't sure at the moment." She responded that she had an assortment of jobs after college. She worked in an after-school program for ten years and at a doctor's office. Then, she said that after she had children, she didn't work again because "her career just didn't matter..." When she made that last statement, her voice trailed off, suggesting that there was a mix of emotions packed inside of it. Perhaps, guilt, frustration, angry, indifference... I'm not sure, but it made me realize that this is a big feminist issue! (Note: I don't mean to offend stay-at-home parents. I respect mothers that want to stay at home with their kids because it's a tough job, but in this post I am discussing working moms).


While women are not confined to their homes like in the 1950's, they are now constrained with "mommy guilt" if they work and have a family. Women are expected to be "superheroes" that work all day but have the time to bake cupcakes for their kid's class, read books to their children and cook a delicious meal.

These images of women are perpetuated in media portrayals. The film I Don't Know How She Does It, to be released September 6th, features an overwhelmed Sarah Jessica Parker trying to juggle work, family life, and a husband. I question what the point of the film is. Is it to give viewers a relatable heroine and stick up for working moms? I think one benefit of a film like this is that it contrasts the media images of women that have "it all figured out." The "perfect" mother now has some flaws and maybe women will feel less pressure to be perfect. But is that true? My thought is that even if Sarah Jessica Parker has struggles in this current film, she still finds that balance at the end of the movie, and the storybook ending ensues. But, what happens after the credits roll?

(http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1/headlines/2011/08/

sarah-jessica-parker-i-dont-know-how-she-does-it-poster.jpg)

Let's be honest here... While writing this post, I saw a Loreal commercial on television with Julianna Margulies. She stared into the camera, exclaiming, "We all need to do ten things at once. That ages you." She then went on to promote Loreal's new anti-aging face wash. Why is it that "We all need to do ten things at once?" Who told women that? Can women work and be moms without "Mommy guilt"? This issue is also complicated by the fact that daycare in the United Stated isn't great. Anyone above the age of 16 can work in a daycare center in the United States, and the required education for daycare teachers is minimal. This doesn't make it easy for parents to feel comfortable leaving their kids in daycare with some (not all) unskilled professionals.

(http://www.celebrityendorsementads.com/celebrity-endorsements/celebrities/

julianna-margulies/images/julianna-margulies-loreal-revitalift-0911.jpg)

I'm tired of being told I need to be perfect and look 21 for the rest of my life to be happy. 

Aren't you?

Will Two Snow White Remakes To Be Released in 2012 Promote Feminist Messages?

Two remakes of Snow White are set to be released in 2012. The first, Snow White and the Huntsman, has been advertised as an action film, comparable to films such as Deep Impact and Lord of the Rings. The image above is intriguing to me. Click the link to view the other pictures of cast members as their characters. In the image, Kristen Stewart is dressed as a knight, suggesting power and strength, yet she is starring away from the viewer. Why is that, since the other images of the queen, huntsman, and prince directly face the viewer? While I have my reservations, it is refreshing to see Snow White minus the dress, perfect look, songs, and birds.

My main question is: Will this be a feminist film? A brief synopsis of the film shares that the evil queen played by Charlize Theron sends a hunstman to kill her stepdaughter. Instead of despairing, Snow White played by Kristen Stewart trains in martial arts to fight the queen. At first glance, this film seems promising, but I'm concerned it will fall into the usual Hollywood traps. While Snow White can protect herself, the films also includes the handsome prince "enchanted by Snow White's beauty."

The second film being released in 2012 is The Brothers Grimm: Snow White, starring Julia Roberts as the queen and Lily Collins as Snow White. An interview with Entertainment Weekly offers some interesting comments from the filmmaker. This version is supposed to be "humorous" as opposed to the other that is "action-oriented." In response to questions about why he chose Julia Roberts, the filmmaker shares that he wanted a "likable queen."

He also comments "She’s the stepmother, but other films are all about narcissism. Who’s more beautiful than the other? This one is more of a power struggle. She wants power, and beauty is just a part of that." I find that comment interesting because power and beauty are so interconnected, and in our culture, a woman's power stems from her beauty. While it is sad to admit, beauty can gain a woman respect and prestige. I also think labeling previous Snow White films as all about "narcissism" offers an incomplete picture. Yes, the queen only cares about herself and being the "fairest of them all", but what strikes me the most about this story is the way the queen must be "fairer" than her stepdaughter. I think it shows the complexities of the relationships between stepmothers and stepdaughters as well as the intricacies of relationships between women and the ways they must hurt each other to achieve beauty and success. I'll give my final verdict when the films are released.

(http://www.celebritiesfans.com/Pic/juliaroberts.jpg)

Can you imagine Julia Roberts as the evil, likable queen?

What if Cinderella just wanted to Hook Up with Prince Charming?

http://penglipurlara.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/disney-cinderella.jpg

A few weeks ago, I saw the film Water for Elephants starring Reese Witherspoon and Robert Pattinson. In the film, Robert Pattinson’s Jacob discovers the dangers and excitement of circus life after his parents are killed in a car accident. He falls for the beautiful Marlena (Reese Witherspoon), the wife of the abusive and cruel ringmaster. I won’t spoil the ending, but I will say that Jacob takes extensive measures to prove his love and loyalty to Marlena. Yes, it isn’t the traditional boy meets girl, they date, and live happily ever after storyline, but there was something romantic and sweet about Jacob’s pursuit of Marlena. I left the theater thinking: How often do men pursue the women of their dreams in the modern dating world?

The fairy tale model where boy meets girl and they run off into the sunset has been twisted, revised, expanded, and turned upside down in recent films. Hook up culture doesn’t fit in well with the happily ever after messages we’re told when we’re young. Can you imagine Cinderella telling Prince Charming after he puts on her glass slipper that she would “just like to hook up and have meaningless fun for a few weeks and then find a new prince” instead of the magical kiss and marriage? I’m going to take a wild guess and say that version would not be popular with parents and young children. Yet, these are the messages young people are navigating through in the modern dating world.

While there is an archetype of the non-committal, sex-crazed male in films such as Knocked Up and American Pie, there are new male and female archetypes emerging to keep up with the changing dating climate. For example, in 500 Days of Summer, Joseph Gordon Levitt’s Tom declares his love for Summer when she openly admits that she doesn’t want a commitment. His heart is broken, yet their relationship I think offers a reality in the dating world. Sometimes things don’t work out, and sometimes one person has different expectations than the other person in a relationship. Tom loves Summer while she is hesitant and anti-committal.

Tom's seeing birds and leading a musical in the park while Summer isn't sharing the love...

http://www.wrensnestonline.com/blog/wp-content/500-days-of-summer1.jpg

The woman who just wants sex without the love is a rising female model Hollywood has used in the films No Strings Attached and Friends With Benefits. I find it amusing that two films with the exact same plot have been released in the same year with actresses that starred in the same Oscar winning movie. While on the surface, the “new” Hollywood leading lady is career-driven and in charge of her sexuality. Yet, is this an empowering view of women? A woman that knows what she wants. I would say no since at the end of the movie she usually changes her mind and trades the career for love. While I think a woman has every right to enjoy her career and hook up, Hollywood films such as No Strings Attached just teach young people that a career is a substitute for a relationship and being in a relationship is of course the best judge of a woman’s character.

So, how do we make sense of these confusing messages? Should a woman wait for Prince Charming to arrive on his white horse? Should she engage in hook up culture? Should she find a “fun friend” to magically fall in love with after weeks of hooking up? Does this actually happen in real life!? I don’t think these answers are simple because I think our society has set up guidelines to punish a woman for whatever choice she makes. If she waits too long, she’ll become a spinster or a prude. Think about Kate Middleton a.k.a “Waity Katie” as deemed by the British press when Prince William wouldn’t propose to her. If she’s too quick to hook up, then she’s called a “slut.” She gets around “too much” and other women resent and judge her. This is a frustrating trap for me, and maybe one day I’ll just get to a point where I don’t care as much anymore.

Below are a few links on this topic:

A Wall Street Journal Blogger on women who want sex while a man wants commitment in Hollywood films.

A review of recent studies done about hooking up on college campuses.

A critique from Fox News about Hollywood's glamorization of domestic violence in teen romances on shows like Gossip Girl and Twilight.

The Differences Between a 'Homance' and a 'Bromance'

While reading reviews for the film Bridesmaids, I encountered the term “homance.” My immediate response was to google a “homance”, and the results were scarce. Urban dictionary offers two diverse definitions. It may mean a relationship between a pimp and his “ho”, but in the context of that article, it is supposed to be the female equivalent of a “bromance” or relationship between two straight males, that is “closer than friendship but less than a dating relationship.” Yet, a homance has different connotations than a bromance. 

When thinking about a bromance, the films, I Love You, Man, Pineapple Express, and The Hangover, come to mind. These characters are goofy, funny, and lovable. I think one reason why the term bromance is so popular is because it is an acceptable form of male friendship. These films have made bromances cool and funny as compared to a situation where two men are just hanging out together in regular friendship. Why? Well, there is still a stigma against two men being called gay if they spend too much time together. I would love a male perspective on this because I don't want to make generalizations.

When I think about a homance, I get stuck on the use of the term "ho" because I would never want to be called that. Why do women and men need to declare that they are in homances and bromances? My worry is that "homance" will become another word feminists need to reclaim after the media has used it to harm women and increase female competition. My inquiry about homances led me to a few articles about the current state of female relationships in films. While men bond through bromances in smash hits, women are tearing each other apart in films. For an example, take a look at Kate Hudson's new film, Something Borrowed. Could Bridesmaids be an exception or is it reinforcing a rule that women need to compete over beauty and men? I'll tell you what I think when I see it!

My Struggle With the Romantic Comedy

This weekend I watched the film Notting Hill, and whether I wanted to or not, I viewed it with a feminist lense. The film stars Julia Roberts and Hugh Grant. Julia’s a famous film star that falls for an ordinary, bookstore owner, Hugh Grant. Their path to true love is a bit rocky since Julie flirts with Hugh while still being in a relationship with her famous boyfriend. After breaking Hugh’s heart, she returns to his place for solace when naked pictures of her surface in the tabloids. They have a romantic weekend until the press finds where she is. She leaves and breaks Hugh’s heart once again. When she returns to Notting Hill to film another movie, she goes to him asking, “After all… I’m just a girl, standing in front of a boy, asking him to love her.” At first Hugh turns her down but then realizes he made a terrible mistake, so he chases after her, comedy ensues, and they have their happily ever after.

I think one of the reasons I wanted to watch this movie again was because Alex Dunphy on Modern Family uses the Julia Roberts line to ask a boy she likes to kiss her in a recent episode. Okay, I love romantic comedies. I’m the girl staring hopefully at the screen during the infamous “I’ll love you forever. We’ll ride off into the sunset and be happy forever” kiss at the end of films, but the end to Notting Hill made me a bit uneasy.

While relationships are difficult and do have their ups and downs, there is something I cannot accept about their relationship. Hugh ignores that Julia used him while she still had a boyfriend. She used his home and heart when she was in trouble, and then easily slipped back into her old life without him. There is something unauthentic about their love since Julia Roberts never seemed committed to it until the last ten minutes of the movie. She also belittles herself at the end of the film. She’s not just a girl. In the film, she’s an amazing actress and strong woman. On the other hand, maybe Julia Roberts is playing a “real” woman. A woman that is confused about her feelings, needs time to sort them through and isn’t perfect.

I’m sitting here wondering if all romantic comedies fall into a trap of conforming to happy endings and stereotypical gender roles. It makes me think about some of my favorite films and how they compare… Just something to think about on a dreary Monday afternoon.