Oh -- well only the female ones, because those are the ones whose hair we should be obsessed with. And only two of them, really, though another few get mentions at the bottom of the "article."
Seriously, why do women get fashion and men get politics? Why do we get to read about Obama's soaring rhetoric and Hilary's "cankles" -- or men's fashion buffoonery alongside women's quiet (always quiet/understated/self-possessed) elegance?
Is this a holdover from the time when the whole point of women looking good was to charm their husbands' bosses? Or is it because now that the consumer-not-citizen bandwagon has turned into a semi that will mow you down if you get in its way, and because it spent so much time working out the in-roads to women's body insecurities that fashion has become a huge, sustainable market, that it is now actually too profitable to stop it? Is this how patriarchy is perpetuating itself -- by making us read about Hayden and Renee's new short haircuts?
If you do read the "article" (and critically), you should note how condescending it is toward Hayden Panetierre, a 20-year-old "girl next door" actress dating a 34-year-old. It theorizes that she's flighty (since she already changed her hairstyle a little while ago), and desperate to be seen as older and "grown-up" for her "grown-up relationship" with 34-year-old-guy, whose main attribute seems to be his 34-year-oldness.
Well, no offense to the guys who may read this blog, but I'd say being 34 doesn't guarantee that a man is a grown-up. Personally, and speaking from the "matures faster" gender, I'm pretty sure I was more grown-up at 20 than I am at 28.
The assumption that Hayden wants to move beyond the "girl next door" parts she's had recently -- cheerleader in both I Love You, Beth Cooper and Heroes -- also seems condescending in this context, as though she really IS the girl next door and trying to exceed her reach. Dating an older man? Haha, so cute! Look, she can't decide which haircut to get -- we assume, because we didn't ask her WHY she got it cut, we only want to speculate! Look at her pretending to be older! Look at her standing up on her hind legs like that!
She thinks she's people!
But probably, other than my intense, awesome queer studies class this term, what's got me all up-in-arms about this is my own reaction: the fact that I clicked on the link, and that when I did, one of my first thoughts was "wow, Renee Zellweger looks equally unhappy in these two pictures. I wish she would frakking smile. She'd be a lot prettier if she did."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
At the risk of being a dissenting voice, I think the notion of patriarchy making you read fashion magazines is a little...well, I mean, I barely know who those people were, so it's got to be something more specific to you.
And, to take the other side, no, I don't feel compelled to read politics magazines either.
Whatever is going on with respect to women and fashion these days, I'm going to hazard that they are in some ways as responsible for it as men are for the travesty that is politics.
I was listening to two female critics talk about actresses, and whether or not they've had plastic surgery, and they said, "but we all have that moment that takes us out of the film, when we're like 'yeah, but what about her hair' or whatever.
And I thought, "No, no that's just you." Because, honestly, I've just never, ever thought of it. Maybe that (some?) women have that moment is a patriarchal one, but I don't see the male gaze or what have you within that moment itself.
just not our thing, sorry.
Post a Comment