Interviews

I have been a slacker and haven't posted the interviews I've done over the past few weeks with media outlets.  I was interviewed for a story for Forbes.com about the changing role of fathers on television.  I was also interviewed for a story for Christian Science Monitor about celebrity and youth cultures. 

Why Asking "Why Can't 'Successful' Black Women Find Good Men?" is a Stupid Question

Why can't "successful" black women find a "good" man? It seems to be a controversial and thought-provoking question on the surface. But when examined more closely, it's a question that is bound up in heteronormative, reproductionist and sanguinuptial notions about men and women and family.  First, it is heteronormative in that it assumes that the role of women (and men) is to couple through the bonds of the socially constructed institution of marriage.  It also presupposes that women want or need to be married.  As if there is something wrong with women who either chose not or are not "honored" with having a man ask them to be married.  The whole premise assumes that for these black women, there is a problem because they can not find suitable mates.  And while it may be true that some women bemoan the unavailability of "good" men (often anecdotally blaming gay men and incarcerated black men), there are other women who are financially secure, have fantastic friends and as such, don't worry about finding a "good" man.

A Woman's Worth

I am one who believes in the power of media to socialize us, particularly children.  So, when I saw this "cartoon" I first laughed and then was taken aback at how true it rings. It's interesting to think that most (if not all) of the Disney classics featuring female lead characters are about the pursuit of a man. And while it'd be foolish to think that children (and specifically girls) think about femaleness and marriage in these terms, they still internalize its messages and start to play those out in life. 

I think there could also be a correlation between some of these characters/cartoons and the way in which modern day weddings have become expensive spectacles that are removed from the initial intent of a marriage ceremony -- which is simply to join two people in a legally binding contract in front of family and friends.

So, the next time you sit your son, daughter, niece, nephew, grandchild or the kid you're babysitting down in front of a Disney film to keep them entertained for a couple of hours, think about the unintentional message they may be absorbing.  

What is Maleness and Femaleness?

There's no need to rip out the front page when I say that we live in a gendered society. And even though we are more than 100 years past the events most often associated with the start of the Women's Rights Movement and about 50 years from the start of second wave feminism, gendering all things in life is, unfortunately alive and well.

As a male, I sometimes forget just how gendered society is and on the occasion that I do forget, it's usually something like the image for this week's cover of Life & Style magazine that slaps me back into reality. In the interest of framing, Life & Style is not The New Yorker. But with a circulation of nearly 500,000, it is certainly worth taking seriously from a media message dissemination perspective (not to mention the millions of people who at least see the headline as they are checking out at the grocery store).

This article is particularly egregious by implying that there are things that are uniquely male and those that are uniquely female -- namely haircuts. Or more to the point, it seems that the editors of Life & Style are implying that short hair equals masculine. While it extends far beyond the issue of race, the trailer from Chris Rock's film Good Hair, provides a great example of how hair is constructed as feminine.



Certainly, from a Marxist perspective one can look at hair as a capitalist endeavor that lines the pockets of beauticians and manufacturers (bourgeoisie) who specialize in hair extensions and weaves while simultaneously exploiting those (proletariat) women in other countries who sometimes cut their hair for religious reasons only to have it sold/used for capitalist reasons. And let's be clear, women of all races and ethnicities participate in this marketplace.

But beyond that, our society is set us as a host of binaries that always privilege one binary over the other: Men/Women. Heterosexual/Homosexual. White/Black. These binaries help us to frame things where we define things by what they are not. In other words, a woman is not a man or a homosexual is not heterosexual -- effectively setting up those things that are "not" as somehow deviant or less than the thing to which they are being compared.

So, why is Shiloh Jolie-Pitt considered less female because she has shorter hair? Why can't she rock a pair of jeans and a polo without having her "girlness" called into question? And most importantly, why would Life & Style question whether or not her (and her parent's) refusal to wholeheartedly adapt to gender norms might somehow harm her?

Certainly, Life & Style knows that news about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt sells magazines, but they also have to be aware that they are helping to brainwash a nation of people into believing that by wearing certain things, or looking a certain way you are able (and rightly should) perform gender. And as icing on the cake, Life & Style also have a story about how Vienna "tricked" Jake on The Bachelor positioning her as cunning and sneaky -- but that's another conversation altogether.

Weight a Minute

Full Disclosure: I am not a woman or a teenage girl. But I do pay attention to media messages and while I have been known to abstractly discuss issues regarding body issues among friends, I can rarely point to specific instances because they all tend to blur. On my Facebook page, I railed against Giuliana Rancic for comments she made to Kathy Griffin who essentially said she looked good because she was starving herself to which Giuliana replied that it didn't matter as long as she looked good. I vented about it and then I got over it. Well my dander was raised again last night upon watching Project Runway. On one hand, we know that runway models are tinier than most women and that when fashion designers choose to use what they call "normal" sized models (whatever the hell that is) a controversy ensues. But it somehow rubbed me the wrong way to have designers on a reality TV show bitching about having to work with "real women." The first slap down is, "Hello! You're on a reality show known for challenges designed to stress you out!" and then secondly, do you plan to make ANY money as a designer? If the answer is yes, then you're going to have to make things in a larger size than a 2.

What it boils down to is that it says that if you are a woman and can't fit into a sample size (usually a 2 or 4) that somehow fashion is not for you. To watch many of the designers struggle to make a dress that flattered a woman who isn't shaped like a prepubescent boy was truly infuriating. And when Tyra Banks allows "plus sized" models on America's Next Top Model (although no winner has ever really reached the "top") it reinforces the problem. Tyra Banks will often say she is trying to change the industry, but what she ends up doing when these women like Whitney (the eventual winner of Cycle 10) or Tocarra (from Cycle 3) are in the competition is reinforce the idea that they shouldn't be in high fashion because the designers with whom they are working often don't have any clothes (or unflattering ones) that will fit them.