Just a bit of Q & A (edited)

In an earlier post, someone commented me asking these three questions:

"Why is todays society so focused on sexuality in the media?

Why do so many young women seek to replicate this ideal of sexuality?

But more importantly: Is this a problem?"

For this particular blog entry, I will seek to offer my own personal perspective and opinion on at least the latter two questions, but briefly. I'm sure there will be more to come on the matter at some point.

Now, to begin. The first feminist book I ever read was "Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women & The Rise of Raunch Culture" by Ariel Levy, and I most heartily recommend it, for those interested in feminism and contemporary culture. This book really got me into feminism. So, if you have read this book, you should be able to see where I'm coming from.

Sexuality In The Media

Sexuality is covered a lot in the media. But, for the most part, it's the same old thing. It's a raunchy, plastic sexuality, often emulating sex-workers. Just look at music videos, women are gyrating against poles, their lithe bodies are barely covered, and are often glistening with baby oil or something. The Sun has its infamous Page 3 girls, and other tabloid papers contain plenty of sexualised pictures of women. Even in movies, for example the Charlies Angels films, the stars are dressed, as Ariel Levy puts it, "in alternating soft-porn styles - as massage parlour geishas, dominatrixes, yodeling Heidis in alpine bustiers". And three words: Girls Gone Wild. So, yes, there's a lot of sexuality in the media.
But, how genuine is this sexuality? As I have described it, it all seems pretty one-dimensional to me. And much of it seems to me to be the objectification of women, and seems to be geared towards men's pleasure.

But why does the media focus on sexuality in this way? I don't know, and as yet I don't have any real theory on it, I'm afraid. But here's one possible, tentative idea.

Ariel Levy says,
"Passion isn't the point. The glossy, overheated thumping of sexuality in our culture is less about connection than consumption. Hotness has become our cultural currency, and a lot of people spend a lot of time and a lot of regular, green currency trying to acquire it."

This could be a chicken-or-egg thing here, but I have to wonder, is the media's focus on this brand of sexuality reflecting what the audience wants, or whether it's helping to stir it up.

It's true that today's obsession with "hotness" and sexuality is profitable and lucrative to many people. From plastic surgeons, to celebrities, to those working within newspapers and magazines, and the advertising industry. Maybe this is why there is a focus on sexuality in the media.

But, to be more specific about the question ("Why is todays society so focused on sexuality in the media?"), here's one possible explanation: the media make this new raunch sexuality thing look pretty damn good. Most people like feeling attractive, and they are told this ideal of sexuality will make them hot. And, it is thrust in our faces a lot of the time, and so today's society focuses a lot on it.

Why do so many young women seek to replicate this ideal of sexuality?

Maybe it's a case of group mentality? Maybe it's simply media manipulation. Personally, I think it's a myriad of reasons.

This new raunch culture style of sexuality (arguably, it can be called a "porno-isation" of our culture) is presented by the media as glossy, fun, sexy. We're told it's "Empowering and liberating." This appeals to women, many of whom do believe this to be empowering and liberating, however whether this is or not is entirely subjective and arguable.

But more importantly: Is this a problem?

Now, do not get me wrong, I would like to state very clearly: I am not an anti-sex prude.

If this is the genuine expression of an individual's sexuality, if this is what makes them feel free and happy, and if they are completely comfortable with this sexuality, and there are some women with which this is the case, then great, it's not a problem. However, I am doubtful as to whether this is the case for the majority.

However, I personally feel that if we are truly liberated about our sexuality, surely it shouldn't be dictated to us or hammered into our conscience by the media. Our expressions of our sexuality should be purely our own, provided that it isn't harmful to anyone. Renev recently posted about women's sexuality, and how the patriarchy tries to control it. I personally believe that the promotion of this new so-called "raunch culture" by the media, is another way of controlling female sexuality. How so? By promoting one single ideal of sexuality, women are not being actively encouraged to develop, or discover, their own individual sexuality, they are not bieng encouraged to look inwardly. And, let's face it, the current ideal of raunch culture sexuality is very plastic, pornified, and largely revolves around the objectification of women. It often appears to me, to be more about the same old stereotypes, and less about individual exploration, or celebration.

In fact, recently a report from the American Psychological Association on the sexualizing of women and girls, stated that there is no doubt that "that the proliferation of sexualized images of girls and young women in advertising, merchandising, and media is harmful to girls’ self-image and healthy development."

This is a problem. Self-image is so, so important, and yet the image and ideal we are promoting and constantly pushing onto women and girls is harmful to their self-image.

NME...and a rant

How could they have awarded Kate Moss the sexiest woman award?!
For starters, she's a model, not a musician, so how is she applicable for an award from a music magazine?!
She is not a responsible, or a positive role model for young girls or women; there's the whole cocaine thing, and the fact that she's super skinny, and yet she's won an award for being sexy. Sexiness is, according to much of our pop culture, a desired and valuable attribute all women should have, and should sweat and slave to achieve. Therefore this sends out the message that drugs are sexy, and that to be sexy, you need to be skinny. And an idiot for some dopehead.

On the other hand, Beth Ditto would've been a much more deserving winner. And it would've sent out a much more positive message: that there's not just one idea of sexiness, you don't have to be thin or conventional looking. You can speak your mind and be yourself, and that's sexy. I think she's beautiful and brilliantly unconventional.

But no.

And it is something of a pipedream, because the media is so stuck on certain concepts of womanhood, and telling women they should be a certain way. They refuse to think outside the patriarchal box.

I also have another bone to pick with the whole sexiest woman award thing. Although there is a sexiest male award, this isn't given as much attention as the sexiest woman award. It's as if to say that the only place for women in music is to be sexy. Even though there are various wonderful, strong, talented female musicians and singers.
The thing is, women in alternative music are not given as much press as males. I haven't bought a Kerrang mag in aaaaages, but women were hardly ever present or mentioned, and when they were it was often in an objectified, stereotypical way. There's an article on the F Word which will go into this in more detail than I will in this particular post: http://www.thefword.org.uk/reviews/2006/09/kerrang.
While men are hailed as heroes, or gods, in rock music, women barely get a mention outside of groupie anecdotes.
And mainstream music - don't even get me started. Videos for pop and r'n'b, and hiphop etc are just a minefield of misogyny. Even when it's a female band, or a female artist, women are still presented in objectified, sexualised lights. And often the lyrical content isn't that much better.

The thing is, music often reflects raunch culture - particularly R'n'B, and HipHop etc, whose lyrics are often damn right misogynistic. Women in music videos are all shiny and skinny, sometimes with large breasts, gyrating against a pole, or simulating a sex act or something. But that's just not what sexiness is about to me. The whole idea of "sexiness" needs one hell of a re-branding. It should be subjective, it should be idiosyncratic, it shouldn't be constricted and restricted and limited and squashed into one small box. I know there are some women who feel sexy with their breast implants, and when they're gyrating against a pole: fine. But to say that to be sexy you have to pander to male fantasy, or to what the media constantly screams at you to be, isn't sexy. You can be sexy if you're slim, curvy, fat. The point is, that sexiness isn't an aesthetic, and it shouldn't be marketed as such, especially since it is marketed as just one aesthetic. To me, sexiness is more about being comfortable with yourself, being able to speak out, not conforming to one ideal. So maybe sexy isn't the right word for it.

This post has been something of a rambling, unstructured rant: we've gone from Kate Moss to Ariel Levy almost. Damn I loved her book!