I think, at least historically,
that teen magazines reveal the consumer /producer dynamic within the girlhood
-- and the lack of girls’ control over the products they consume. Like all print media, I am sure magazines
have been declining in popularity since the advent of the internet, but given
the recent news story involving Seventeen and their alteration of female photos,
they still enjoy some relevancy.
To recap the Seventeen
story: In April, Julia Bluhm, a
14-year-old Seventeen reader from Maine, started an online petition intended to
expose the magazine’s heavy use of Photoshop.
Eventually, she garnered over 84,000 signatures, all seeking an end to
the altered images in the magazine. Seventeen’s response was disappointing:
while their editor (through a spokesperson) stated, “We’re proud of Julia for
being so passionate about an issue,” they pretty much denied their heavy dependence
on Photoshop. According to the feminist
news site Jezebel, “So, a quick list of what Seventeen is not doing under the
terms of this "treaty": it is not going to stop Photoshopping its
models and celebrity subjects. It is not going to acknowledge that its reliance
on Photoshop has ever been in any way problematic. It is not going to commit to
publishing any unretouched photo spreads. Lame” (Jezebel.com).
So … how much control do the
readers of Seventeen have, really? It seems
the magazine offered little more than lip-service to the 84,000 petition
signers. The reality is, the readers of
Seventeen continue to consume the magazine despite their Photoshopping
policy. Seventeen’s editors realize
this. Ultimately, I don’t think the
magazine is interested in bolstering their readers’ body image or confidence
levels, at least as much as their interest in the bottom line. (I remember reading it as a teen, and tucked
between real-life stories of girls suffering from serious eating disorders were
pencil-thin models and articles about “looking great for Saturday night” or “tightening
your butt.” Hypocrisy much?)
About a year or so ago, Vogue
(or Vanity Fair?) put a plus-size woman on their cover – but, unlike most of
their cover shots, they only showed her face. Fat doesn’t sell, and unattractive doesn’t
sell, and Seventeen (and most magazines targeted at girls and women) realizes
this. In fact, Teen Vogue was also approached
about their Photoshop policy, and their response was even more depressing than
Seventeen’s.
Of course, magazines like
Bitch are more committed to a less-appearance-centric portrayal of womanhood,
but its target audience is women in their 20s and 30s. Do you think there is even a market for a
Bitch-like magazine catered to teen girls?
Further, do you think Seventeen’s Photoshop policy is wrong? And do you think the majority of their
readers would condone the policy if they were made aware of it?
This is a great post and great example of the hegemonic consumption/production of teen girls. Your post really speaks to the ways that teen girls are positioned as objects for consumption through the systematic reproduction of "material" bodies. The example you used is so strong. This would be a great thing topic for discussion at the girlhood remixed camp.
ReplyDeleteI am not fond of any of the young magazines for girls but there are zines and spaces that are appearing that do show strong girlhood images and in that sense they are producing. With the virtual spaces, girls are able to create blog sites and 'commonplaces' meant for them. With that said, consumption of the magazine itself is probably the only way change would occur. How many years has "Seventeen" been in production? Hard to change old habits unless economics help it along.
ReplyDeleteGirls learn that there is power in beauty, so in their teen years they are playing with that power. It is as women age and loose some of their youthfulness that they become more focused on other types of power not related to appearance. (Present company excluded.) Unless there is a massive reeducation, magazines like Seventeen, or Cosmo, won't lose their appeal. There is also the argument that young women's appearance and sexuality are the only power they have.
ReplyDeleteLove this post Hayley--it got me thinking about Adele--I mean, the majority of the population are doing renditions of her songs, her albums getting people through breakups, getting people laughed at in karaoke bars, getting put into memes, etc. And while she is a gorgeous person (seemingly inside and out) and the population likes her, even one of the most influential people in present day music industry can't be featured in a magazine unless she is cropped, wearing a ton of black and angled 'just so' because she isn't a single digit size... great perspective...
ReplyDeleteGreat post! So maybe some of the power of homemade crafts like quilts is in not only the production but also the consumption? It is a space where women can decide what to take in, what to value, rather than being told what to value.
ReplyDeleteDo you see women's crafts as having ideals and standards too? Seems much of their beauty comes in not being cookie cutter reproductions that are mass produced.