Representations Of Women In Print Magazines
Brianna Canty
Costanza Prandoni
Literature Review: The phenomenon we are addressing in our humanistic paper proposal is representations of sexuality in media, specifically representations of women in print magazines. There is a great deal of previous research in this area because women’s magazines have been “crafting images of women that transformed American culture” for almost 200 years (Endres 434). In The Journal of Advertising, Steven M. Kates discusses why the way women are represented in print advertisements is problematic, namely because it “does not incorporate the notion that texts invite multiple readings” (Kates 34). Kates draws from cultural studies and feminist film criticism to “synthesize relevant research” in order to illustrate “the way that ad interpretations are constituted by social and commercial discourses” (Kates 40). Kathleen L. Endres explains the repercussions of advertisements featuring oversexualized women in Encyclopedia of Gender in Media, stating they “scarred generations of women, endangering their health, damaging their bodies, and ruining their self-esteem” (Endres 434). Researchers are especially concerned with how these advertisements affect young girls and alter their self-perception. In Peggy Orenstein’s article “What’s Wrong with Cinderella”, published in the New York Times, the mother argues that advertisements are instilling a “preoccupation with body and beauty” in young girls (Orenstein). She discusses how Disney princesses are “interested only in clothes, jewelry and cadging the handsome prince”, in turn advocating for “the most conventionally feminine beliefs-to avoid conflict and think they should be perpetually nice and pretty”. Orenstein provides evidence to support her argument that images such as Disney princesses have “resuscitated the fantasy of romance that the era of feminism threatened” and lead to “a lifelong struggle over body image, a Hundred Years’ War of dieting, plucking, painting and
Costanza Prandoni
Literature Review: The phenomenon we are addressing in our humanistic paper proposal is representations of sexuality in media, specifically representations of women in print magazines. There is a great deal of previous research in this area because women’s magazines have been “crafting images of women that transformed American culture” for almost 200 years (Endres 434). In The Journal of Advertising, Steven M. Kates discusses why the way women are represented in print advertisements is problematic, namely because it “does not incorporate the notion that texts invite multiple readings” (Kates 34). Kates draws from cultural studies and feminist film criticism to “synthesize relevant research” in order to illustrate “the way that ad interpretations are constituted by social and commercial discourses” (Kates 40). Kathleen L. Endres explains the repercussions of advertisements featuring oversexualized women in Encyclopedia of Gender in Media, stating they “scarred generations of women, endangering their health, damaging their bodies, and ruining their self-esteem” (Endres 434). Researchers are especially concerned with how these advertisements affect young girls and alter their self-perception. In Peggy Orenstein’s article “What’s Wrong with Cinderella”, published in the New York Times, the mother argues that advertisements are instilling a “preoccupation with body and beauty” in young girls (Orenstein). She discusses how Disney princesses are “interested only in clothes, jewelry and cadging the handsome prince”, in turn advocating for “the most conventionally feminine beliefs-to avoid conflict and think they should be perpetually nice and pretty”. Orenstein provides evidence to support her argument that images such as Disney princesses have “resuscitated the fantasy of romance that the era of feminism threatened” and lead to “a lifelong struggle over body image, a Hundred Years’ War of dieting, plucking, painting and