From
exaggerated expectations of girly manners to negative portraits of female cruelty,
the definition of girlhood has been shifting over the years. Regardless of the categorization
of the era –or as Chesney and Irwin call it, “the flavor of the month”—, these
are classifications that unfortunately still box females into specific shapes. Media
feeds from stereotypes that in returned feed popular culture, causing social behavior
epidemics in both females and males. Chesney and Irwin briefly mention a
subject that we tend to forget: boys are also stereotyped and boxed in to cultural
norms (p. 48). The difference, however, is that boys usually don’t lose rights
and/or individuality when following the “blue” social standards (I am generalizing,
obviously, because it is well-known that the “boys-don’t-cry” code can seriously
affect the individuality of a boy). More often than not women that follow a
strict pink code of girlhood deprive themselves of humanhood to become tools of
society –like the case of Lady Mansfield and her obsession with being a hyper
pink think. Why should we care to study the identity of femininity? It is
important to know the causes of certain behaviors to eventually shift social paradigms
that affect the rights of this group (women rights to attend school, to work in
any field, to vote, etc.). The author of “The Pink Think” accurately argues
that “Integral to pink think is the belief that one’s success as a woman is
grounded in one’s allegiance to such behavior” (p. 8).
Women paradigm
shifting is never easy for the fact that pink norms are embedded in women
before they are even born. The pink room is arranged as soon as the sex of the
baby girl is determined. Studies also appear to suggest that girlhood standards
are intertwined with race. While African-American and Latino bad girls are
associated with gangs from “the hood or the barrio,”
white bad girls are linked to a more subtle type of criminal behavior: “relationship
bulling” –the so-called mean girls or “frenemies.” Studies prove that girlhood
goes beyond women in opposition to a man and are now paying close attention to the differences
between the many shades of pink.
Nora
Your mentioning Jayne Mansfield reminded me of the age component of femininity and sexuality. Many of today's women would be affronted to think their sexual power ended at 32 or 34.
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking about boys and the blue code. Boys seem to gain rights (timed-honored rights of masculine power) but lose individuality when following the blue code. Both the pink and blue ways of constructing minimize individuality. There is something here about the group mentality and belonging. Perhaps individuals in girlhood and boyhood are more susceptible to the pink and blue constructs because of the desire to belong. Media is then able to capitalize on these instincts.
I like your comment about shifting social paradigms. Have you heard the idea that feminism is dead?
I haven't heard about feminism being dead, but I think that as times have changed, the ways of expressing the idea of feminism have also changed. In recent books we don't see the main female character trying to survive an unwanted marriage (like the Awakening), but we do see young ladies fighting along with men (Like the Hunger Games). The idea might not be as radical as before (because perhaps there is no need to be that radical), but I think it is still there.
ReplyDeleteNora
Nora,
ReplyDelete"Media feeds from stereotypes that in returned feed popular culture, causing social behavior epidemics in both females and males."
Regarding your statement above, it clearly reveals the circular interplay within media, pop culture, and stereotypes. The seams have become increasingly nebulus in terms of identifying where one stops and the other starts. The symbolism and representations of pink think still exist in today’s consumer and social culture; however with less emphasis on the color and more on the attitude.
Thank you for sharing you perspectives...
The feminism discussion is a good one. We generally think of feminism in three waves, with a possible fourth now being contested. The first wave tends to be about the right to vote and such in the late 1800s, early 1900s. The second wave was more of the 1960s movement toward equality (The Second Sex, Gloria Steinem, etc.). The third wave recognized the bias of the previous feminist movements to be one that was focused mainly on White experience. It called then not for equality but for multiplicity and recognition of those on the margins.
ReplyDeleteThe discussion now is where we are at - some see a fourth wave that continues the work of the third, some say we are in a post-feminist wave/movement. It's hard for me to see it as a post-feminist time when things like birth control funding are still hugely important in political campaigns. What do you folks think?