One of my favorite discussions we have had thus far is about how obesity/being overweight is a disability in our society today. We discussed the idea that being overweight in itself is a greater problem according to society than the actual side effects of being overweight (high blood pressure, risk for heart disease, etc.). We discussed the overall concept that defining someone as obese or overweight requires the statement and definition of a weight that is considered "normal." The problem, however, is that there is no "normal" when discussing bodies because they are supposed to vary by race, gender, ethnicity, etc. However, society strives to create an image of "normal," (with merely two subcategories, one for male and another for female) not just regarding weight, but regarding height, skin tone, poise, and even minute details almost required to vary from person to person such as the existence of pores on one's face. As an individual, to fulfill our societal obligation, we are supposed to strive to be as close to "normal" as we possibly can be.
Inquiring into the aspect of "normal" and society's portrayal of the term, I refer to a paper I wrote last year for Introduction to General Sociology. In the paper, I analyzed advertisements and their portrayal of women in society. The two primary sources I used for locating these advertisements were Glamour and InStyle, two popular feminine magazines. I used the most recent issues of the magazines available at the time I did the study (April 2007). In the study, I found that a significant portion of advertisements in both magazines was used to either sell something (with an idealistic female using or modeling the item to be sold) or to advertise the negative consequences of a slightly out of shape body. Regarding the sale of products, the models had to sell themselves, rather than the actual product. By selling their "normal"desired body, consumers purchased the products they advertised, thinking that if the model ("normal") uses product X, I should also use product X and will soon become the "normal."
In my paper, I continue to explain that these above magazines (and other similar magazines) are available in highly developed countries such as the USA. However, in the documentary, Beyond Killing us Softly: The Strength to Resist, Professor Carrol Gilligan asserts that there are no eating disorders in Ethiopia including overeating and obesity or anorexia and bulimia. In other words, the industrialized nation notion of a tall, slender, seductive female ("normal") as the maxim of physical humanity does not exist. The reason for this cultural difference (and benefit) is simply because television and magazines that define what is culturally beautiful or what should be culturally accepted are nonexistent in Ethiopia. There is no overbearing, universally available source to dictate the norm.
The reason understanding this is important is because we need to realize that first off, the notion of a norm is created by us as a society. Second and more importantly, we must realize that it is possible to live in a society without a default norm (as in Ethiopia). Most importantly, to prevent our industrialized world from becoming monotonous, striving for the ultimate norm (which , by the way, is completely subjective), we must remove the norm from society. Luckily, we're in the process of moving in that direction (Dove Campaign for Beauty advertisements use genuine females without digital body touch ups). However, based solely on the fact that our society's extreme norms exist in magazines dated from just over six months ago proves that we still have loads of progress to make.
Beyond Killing Us Softly: The Strength to Resist. Dir. Margaret, Lazarus. Videocassette. Cambridge Documentary Films, 2000.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think it's really interesting that you mention the overwhelming presence of a "normal weight" and advertising of products to get this norm. That's something that I've noticed about magazines as well. There was one time when I was in line CVS and I was looking at the different magazines by the checkout. On the cover of almost every magazine there was a headline for some article that was about loosing weight, getting in shape, getting the "perfect" body. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that I would be surprised to pick up a magazine, whether it's Cosmo, US weekly or People and not find at least one article that focused on weight and reaching a "better" weight. Even the articles that try to be somewhat empowering, "Find the perfect bathing suit for you body," on the surface may seem to say, 'you don't need to change anything, you can find a bathing suit that you look great in just as you are', seem to have undertones that you need a special bathing suit to make you look good, not just anyone will work. This is probably not on purpose and I may be reading way too into it, but when every other article is about what ten minute workout I can do to tighten my tummy, it's a little hard not to feel bombarded by messages that my body isn't good enough and is something that I need to fix.
This idea of a "normal" weight is really interesting, especially in pop culture. We get this idea of what the ideal body looks like, or is supposed to look like, by watching, listening, and reading about pop culture. It's ingrained in our society. Imagining the U.S. as not having a "norm" similar to Ethiopia is a bit extreme. I don't think we'll ever reach that point, but I do think people coming out and talking about norms in a different way is really important. I was recently reading an interview with Queen Latifah where she was asked about her body. The interviewer asked how she felt when she is described as curvy and she said she didn't like it. She admitted to being curvy but she defined herself (her size, her shape) as completely normal. Compared to the U.S. standard, she is normal. She mentioned that in the media, "normal" is portrayed as a stick skinny white woman, and that that is just not the case. To have smart, intelligent, famous women come out and portray a new image of "normal" is great and necessary so people do not have this distorted, unrealistic view of themselves and others.
I'm glad that you mentioned the fact that the "normal" body type is to an extent unattainable due to variation based on race and fundamental anatomy. It is utterly unrealistic to think that everyone can change their body and adjust to fit a single mold. It is almost as unrealistic as claiming that only a very specific height is "normal." Furthermore, the fact that "normal" is often represented by ideals so extreme that they themselves comprimise health is bewildering. The "normal" female figure (as represented by supermodels)is at least slightly underweight.
The reality that a great extent of advertisements and magazine pictures have been digitally altered cannot be overemphasized.
This concept of taking individuals, morphologically disecting them, and recomposing them to fit the standard highlights the fact that our conception of beauty has been entirely fabricated without much basis in reality.
There is a really good Dove ad that shows the "evolution of beauty" in this fashion.
Post a Comment