Wednesday, March 28, 2018

Their Eyes Were Watching Misogyny


From: P
Si (left) and Won (right) are some of my favorite kids to babysit. Won,  Si’s older brother, loves everything about football and is fairly progressive in his views regarding what men and women can do. Si is five, loves princesses and purple, and isn’t able to verbalize her views on gender yet. On the day this photo was taken we decided to watch one of my favorite childhood movies: ANTZ. Adulthood paired with a few weeks of the Introduction to Women’s Studies course at AACC ruined my love for this movie, but it was great inspiration for this photo. Alison Bechdel created a comic strip in which a woman described three rules she lives by when choosing a movie to see. Essentially, the movie must have two significant female characters who talk to each other about something other than the men in the movie; ANTZ totally failed this test (Bechdel 1). This photo represents the gender inequalities within children’s media as well as the effects those inequalities had on Si and Won.
An inequality within the film that is obvious, but often overlooked is it’s exclusion of women. It was built on what Katha Pollitt calls the “Smurfette Principle.” There are thousands of men within the movie, but only three women. And, of course, the women existed as the love interests of the men in the movie. Additionally, two of the women were simply named “Queen” or “Princess” while the men were given strong titles such as “General” or “Cutter.” The lack of individuality within women’s names, body types, and roles in children’s media says “boys are the norm, girls the variation; boys are central, girl peripheral” (Pollitt 1). I decided to blur Si’s image because of this principle. As she continues to be conditioned as a background character in life and sees these unrealistic feminine characters in movies, stores, and restaurants, her sense of individuality may disappear. Instead of being the sassy pediatrician she desires to become, society may force her into being a woman who focuses on being feminine enough so that a prince will sweep her off her feet.
            Even though certain effects of gendering may show up in the future, others manifested quickly. It was not long after viewing the dance club scene that Si and Won decided they wanted to dance as well. Before I knew it, Won was spinning Si in circles. He was obviously leading the dance, and Si seemed to enjoy it. From the outside looking in, it appears that I captured a fun moment, but Si told me she didn’t like to be spun around by her brother. In fact, she liked to spin herself. This inspired the low clarity and slanted perspective of the photo. Due to the way in which they are socially conditioned, “boys tend to act more assertively than girls do” (Rudman et al. 62). This conditioning in boys is matched with the conditioning of girls to believe that femininity means being gentle. I have learned that this type of gendering is not always wanted by the child or the adult they grow into. Si didn’t like being spun around, but she didn’t vocalize her discomfort. Won thought he was supposed to spin Si around, but once he saw how much fun spinning yourself could be, he decided to spin himself as well. Sometimes gender roles turn the world on its side instead of keeping order and allowing society to run smoothly. These roles create a pretty picture, but things aren’t always as they appear to be.
            These pretty pictures have been painted for ages. In order to illuminate the timelessness of gender roles, I made the photo black and white. Unwanted gender roles have been causing issues within American households since before we had color television. Betty Friedan discussed “The Problem That Has No Name” in her book The Feminine Mystique. Stay-at-home mothers in the 1960s were feeling “a strange stirring, a sense of dissatisfaction” because everything they did was for their husbands and children: cooking, cleaning, attending PTA meetings, washing walls, and more(Friedan 15). Even the advertisements within the media at that time were shoving the separate sphere agenda down people’s throats. From the time we are born, girls are taught to be caretakers while boys are taught to just be tough individuals. Boys are still usually dressed in blue, and girls in pink, but I see that parents are becoming more progressive in the activities they allow their children to participate in.
             

Bibliography
Bechdel, Alison. “The Rule.” Dykestowatchoutforcom RSS, dykestowatchoutfor.com/the-rule.
Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique: with a New Introduction and Epilogue by the Author. Dell, 1974.
Pollitt, Katha. “Hers; The Smurfette Principle.” The New York Times, 7 Apr. 1991.
Rudman, Laurie A., et al. "The Two Cultures of Childhood." The Social Psychology of Gender: How Power and Intimacy Shape Gender Relations. The Guilford Press, 2015, 59-63.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Your post caught my eye for a few reasons. Many movies and shows from my past have been ruined also, to even include The Smurfs. I am standing by Thundercats though, I won't be swayed, haha. Another reason this caught my attention is because I have two kids, a boy and a girl and I thought about all the movies they love!! My little girl loves all the princess movies, she even use to dress up like them...however she is the little girl that had a black eye because she is a dare devil and climbs EVERYTHING(!), she would also have on a pirates hat on with the dress, she never seemed to care if it was "for girls" which looking back I'm pretty happy with that part, same goes for my son, he never thought of playing with his sister or his toys as too girly or anything, they ran around like a little team that had fun. My son had the power-wheels mustang and my daughter had the barbie jeep, they shared or drove around together. My son, who is about 18 months older, is much different. He was always very cautious, never really cared for sports (unlike both his parents who played everything possible) but he loves mustangs...very specifically mustangs. Cars are something that neither of us EVER cared about so that's all him. I don't think my kids ended up like this on purpose, we just always let them be individuals. Everything is open to both of them all they have to do is ask.

I'm not 100% sure how to approach the media they watch. I hope they understand like I did growing up that these movies are for entertainment. I'll have to do a little more research on this topic.

Side-note on Friedman and 1960's. I think society should have called it what it was and approached it differently at that the same time openly explaining to women and men the ramifications on a country post world war. The mid 60's would be roughly 18-20 years post WW2, the baby boomers rd 1 babies were JUST turning 18. By being so flexible and adaptive woman saved our nation post war. I think by them going into the households and letting men take their jobs back may have prevented an unquantifiable amount of damage. PTSD wasn't a known thing then and it could have been VERY bad if all those troops came home from a super violent war and didn't have a purpose. The population jumped some crazy number that I am too lazy too look up right now but its like a common knowledge thing, haha. I do honestly feel if that whole issue was packaged differently and gave women more option instead of feeling pressured to be stay at home moms it could have been a none or way lesser issue. Just my shitty opinion though.