um novo assunto

ou talvez nem tanto. as verdades custam a admitir, é preciso mastigá-las e engoli-las com esforço. mas, por outro lado, há a velha questão dos pontos de vista: a vista da janela do rés do chão é diferente da vista do sétimo andar, na cave nem se fala ou nas traseiras da casa. e a vista aérea... aqui se fala de revistas "femininas". entre aspas porque falta definir feminino, porque falta saber que aquilo é o feminino ou se o feminino acaba ali. à primeira vista, parecem-me tão vácuas como as "masculinas". e, se bem que não se procure Henry James quando se quer escolher a maquilhagem do próximo verão, há ideias subversivas a infiltrarem a sua toxicidade sem que se dê por isso. ou então dá-se e ignora-se ou ainda, dá-se e pensa-se em outra coisa, a outra coisa que seria possível se o tal denominador comum não tendesse a ser sempre a linha mais baixa.

What's Wrong With Women?
The portrait of American women painted by their magazines is devastating. There are two themes, both them explored with an unbelievably repetitive total puerility that is well crystallized in the phrase "total hair happiness": sex and appearance, which, in combination, seem to constitute both self-esteem and (thus) the meaning of life. It's difficult for a fellow not to notice - perhaps with a certain pleasure - that these interests converge on us: understanding men, pleasing men, manipulating men, showing men your breasts.
Women's magazines are, in short, monthly guidebooks adding up to thousands of glossy pages on how to achieve a chirpy, kicky subordination to men. They're actually not too far from Slave: How to Grin, Shuck, Jive, and Pick Cotton.
(...)
I'm not really sure what happened to feminism. But at a gander it looks to me like patriarchy won, and that all segments of our society are reasonably satisfied with that result. Perhaps I will be accused of blaming the victim. But you'll never be free if what you most deeply desire is to submit. And there's no point in being free if there's nothing of enduring value that you know or seek.
(...)
One thing we could say by way of exculpation is that the American magazine industry, like American politics, is diseased by formula and a global failure of courage and creativity. And popular magazines practice a sort of least-common-denominator moronism that is common to all American mass-media, from major-label pop music to network television to, um, men's magazines. In fact, magazines such as Maxim are essentially Cosmo for men, and display no deeper set of truths. But the theme of what's wrong with men, though rich, must be left for another occasion.
Woman, what's wrong with you?"
(daqui)
por outro lado, a questão parece-me vã. se compro a Vogue não posso ler Henry James? felizmente que o complexo de assunto "menor" já se foi na voragem, mas não posso deixar de concordar com " you'll never be free if what you most deeply desire is to submit."

e aqui:
"In the preface of her 1963 book The Feminine Mystique, Betty Freidan wrote: “There was a strange discrepancy between the reality of our lives as women and the image to which we were trying to conform”. Although the vast majority of women’s lives have changed beyond Freidan’s greatest hopes since she wrote those words, the disparity between the media’s view of women and women’s real lives is still in some ways present. While adopting a veneer of feminism, women’s magazines are actually extremely reactionary, oppressive and old-fashioned. Open up your average mag and what do you see? How To Be Better In Bed. This Season’s Key Pieces. Eyeliner 101. Celebs talk about their boyfriends. “My Night As A Lesbian”. The World’s Most Romantic Holiday Destinations. Luxury Health Spas. Recipes For A Summer Barbeque. Passing lipservice is paid to independence and career, but the main message girls are getting from the magazines meant to represent their interests is that what is really important is sex and fashion. In theory they’ve got bright futures - but in practice, get thin and get a boyfriend." belo artigo da The F Word.

e ainda aqui:
"Women’s History Month should feel different this 2009. We’re living in an epicenter of change and progression. We have powerhouses Nancy Pelosi and Hilary Clinton sitting high in the White House. Tina Fey represents our new wave of venerated cultural icons. And before our new president married our first lady, he was reporting to her in the workplace. Yes, smart is sexy again. Or is it?

The truth is, you’d never know it from reading the literature of the liberated: women’s magazines, the bright, blessed keys to the pop culture kingdom. And let’s face it, no matter how many times we’ve read The Feminine Mystique, how many of us have turned to the “How to Really, Really Please Your Man,” article we spotted while waiting for our wine to be scanned at the checkout line?"

"But women’s magazines weren’t always a medium for recycled, superficial news, nor were their readers always in the market for it. They used to be (dare I say it?) thoughtful, provoking, political … something completely different from what we pick up today. So since when did scouring the literature in the checkout line become a guilty pleasure rather than an intellectual pursuit? When did the literature turn guilty?"
(...)
But as a woman of this exciting new year of change and progression, I wonder about the covers pushing too many new ways to say, “It’s all about him” each month. I’m all for the sexual revolution, but is “Eight Things Guys Crave in Bed” what Gurly and others had in mind? How liberated is the new, liberated woman of 2009? And how much are our girly magazines signs of the times?"

Maybe with our new wave of role models, our magazines will be up for a makeover soon again. There are many of us who would gladly choose Michelle Obama for our cover girl (thank you, Vogue) rather than someone anatomically incorrect. Or perhaps at the end of a long day at the office, some women just want to forget about the revolution and dive into the fluff of bright photos. That’s the thing about the “new woman”—you never know who she’s going to be next."
(daqui)

uma última frase simpática, enfim. seja como for, nas revistas ou na comunicação social em geral, talvez (eufemismo) fosse positivo subir a fasquia. este tema nem tem nada de novo.
(e obrigada, Rui)