The Cosmopolitan Magazine Representation of Gender and Sexuality - Case Study Example

PART I: CASE STUDY: The Cosmopolitan Magazine Representation of Gender and Sexuality Since its launch in 1886, the Cosmopolitan (hereunder Cosmo) has attracted both supporters and critics in equal measure. While the former argue that the magazine has advance the cause of women by giving them the power to direct relationships through their sexual power, the latter argue it has reduced women to mere objects, whose only source of power over men is their sexuality. Thornborrow (2003, p. 453) for example states that Cosmo creates fantasies which portray women as lone actors who “rely on acts of seduction and social manoeuvring, rather than on intellect, to act in and on the world”. Assuming that Thornborrow’s views were right, then it would appear that Cosmo goes against the feminist precepts which seek to advance women as equal in power and abilities as their male counterparts. Among the main messages that Cosmo readers receive is that they are responsible for maintain their relationships with men, and should therefore do whatever they can to change not only themselves, but also the men in their lives (Gupta, Zimmerman and Fruhauf, 2008). While such an advice may seem empowering especially since it creates the impression that women have the ability to change men, Gupta et al. (2008) argues that Cosmo’s advice is always view the female sexual charm as the only tool that can achieve whatever goals a woman has in relationships. Despite its portrayal of women as mere objects, whose only source of power is their sexuality, Cosmo is a million-dollar magazine with readership spanning all the continents in the world. But does this mean that the women readers swallow the apparent stereotypes created by the magazine hook, line and sinker? Well, no one knows for sure, but if the readership or circulation numbers indicated about the magazine are anything to go by, women all over the world love the Cosmo. Whether or not such a wide acceptance means that they no longer subscribe to the feminist ideologies is however not clear. What is clear however is that while the likes of Betty Friedan argued that women could find fulfilment in multiple places including in the world of work, Cosmo seems to suggests that the greatest fulfilment that women can find is beside men; additionally, the suggestion is that the fulfilment could even be more wholesome with women scoring the shots in the relationship (Hollows, 2000). Looking at Cosmo from a different perspective however reveals that much as the magazine’s representation of women could be perceived as anti-feminist, it could be that its negotiation with realities that face women in their everyday lives in an element of the feminist discourse. For example, the magazine portrays the modern woman as one who has to juggle between work responsibilities and her position in a relationship. With the independence that comes with working, Cosmo seems to enhance women’s position in the confines of their homes with some sense of sexual liberation. As a mainstream magazine, one must also understand that Cosmo is a publication that is founded on the capitalist thought. As such, the publishers have a profit motive and could therefore care less about commoditising feminist ideas as long as the contents of the publication appeal to the target audience hence driving up sales. As Gough-Yates (2007) observes however, the producers of consumer products that enjoy a wide acceptance among the targeted audience usually understand the kind of identities their target audience seek. The product they market is therefore “configured, delineated, dramatised, represented, and re-presented” in a manner that appeal to the identities that the consumers seek. Applied in the Cosmo context, one could argue that the magazine produces and reflects the femininities that the women readers of the magazine are willing to identify with. In other words, supporters of Cosmo could argue that the magazine simply acknowledges the importance of sexuality in the female gender, and does not attempt to ignore the fact that even politically and socially powerful women have a sexual being that needs to be explored, and perhaps used in a manner that gives power to the woman. Appendix 1 is just an illustration of the familiar cover, with the Cosmo girl dressed in a manner that signifies sexual availability and leisure; the gaze suggesting friendliness (or sometimes outright hostility); and the provocative titles that appeal to its target audience (McMahon, 1990). Perhaps the best indication of the representation of gender and sexuality in the Cosmo can be seen in the advertisements it features. As one would expect, all advertisements target women; however, there are other twists to the adverts. Usually, they appeal to the women’s need to have better sex lives or relationships. In other words, the adverts seem to tell the woman that she can have a better sexual experience/relationship by using the featured products. Although the magazine does not state in any outright terms that the male gender is its centre of focus, one can gather the same from the advice offered therein. Specifically, the magazine pays too much focus on what women should do in order to please men. Specifically, the magazine through its emphasis on how women should look, dress and weigh seem to underline the believe that men like women based on their physical appeal and not the quality of their behaviours, talent and other substantive qualities advanced by the feminist thought. As Tara (2009, Para 1) observes, “most women in Cosmopolitan are shown as beautiful, thin and sexually skilled. Men are shown as attractive, muscular and physically strong, but often unemotional and uncommunicative”. To its credit, Cosmo seems to nudge women to take up the fearless role and explore more possibilities of getting satisfaction in their lives. While this would be a good advice on any day, the fact that it is based on women’s sexuality is what most critics have a problem with. To them, sexuality is just one of the components of the female gender. Intellect, wisdom and interpersonal skills are just other factors that have been neglected by the magazine as it advances femininity stereotypes that portray women as sexual objects whose main focus should be attracting men, and satisfying them sexually. As indicated above however, Cosmo’s representation of women is most probably informed by its profit-making motive and cannot therefore be objective to the feminine cause, because by so doing, it might end up losing its market share hence jeopardising its profitability in the long-run. PART II: ANALYTICAL ESSAY Gender and Computer Games In the wake of increasing equality between men and women, it is evident that latter are increasingly coming across infuriating stereotypes that not only remind them of the patriarchy notions deeply rooted in the society, but also of the fact that it will take deliberate political, social and legal decisions for women to be placed at the same pedestal with men. This not withstanding, the equableness of gender has perhaps brought about an increased participation of women in the gaming world. Most specifically, more women are now taking up playing computer games and are hence forming a significant target market for the game developers. Yet, it is worth noting that the way the same games are constructed often portray the female characters as sexual objects. In a study conducted on games targeting children in Oakland California, a non-government organisation (Children Now, 2002) for example found that only 15 percent of the characters used in video games were female, while 73 percent were male. Of the 15 percent female characters, 50 percent were either sued as bystanders or props, and were meant to serve as “sexual eye candy” (Leonard, 2006, p. 84). The sexuality of such characters was highlighted through the creation of large breasts and small waists. Additionally, Children Now (2002) found that the video games featured in the study limited the roles of female character to sex-related roles, with 20% of the characters exposing their breasts, while 10% more exposed their butts. Although gender stereotypes are not the only misrepresentation of reality there are in video games, Leonard notes that the commodification of gender and especially of the female characters as sexual objects is most prevalent. Specifically, Leonard (2006, p. 85) notes that “female participants wear the skimpiest possible G-string bathing suits that leave little to imagination; all the characters have large, exposed breasts regardless of colour”. In other words, the games, just like in the Cosmo discussed earlier in part I of this essay, represent women as sexual objects whose main role is to gratify men. The main problem with such sexual commodification in games is that unlike the Cosmo which targets a specific age-bracket, they are played by the young, middle-aged and even older males and females alike (Cassell & Jenkins, 2000). Additionally and as Leonard (2006) observes, video games are tools of virtual literacy and though people are rarely aware of this, they “teach, inform and control” the players. In an earlier work, Leonard (2003, p. 1) had indicated that video games are no longer toys for kids; rather they are “sophisticated vehicles inhabiting and disseminating racial, gender, or national meaning”. In other words, the virtual experience that video game players encounter shapes their perceptions in real-life. If for example the young male player gets the perception that female gender is only meant to offer the male gender sexual gratification, it would be hard for him to believe otherwise outside the virtual word. On the other hand, female players may get the impression that their roles in the real word must conform to the sexist notions portrayed in the video games. Urla and Swedland (1995) for example observe that more women may undergo breast implant surgeries, take up dieting routines or aerobics among other activities, in an effort to fit into the beauty myth propagated in video games and other popular media. But could video games be receiving bashing when all they do is represent what goes on in the real world? Well, Provenzo (1991) is among writers who state that the video games are simply a reflection of the prevailing cultural hegemony. According to him, video games are not completely wrong their symbolic social constructs; however, (at least according to Provenzo) their only mistake is that they help in maintaining the patriarchal culture that perceives and treats women as commodities. Specifically, Provenzo (1991, p. 138) notes that video games perpetuate “bias and gender stereotyping”. In addition to portraying women as sexual objects, Cassell and Jenkins (2000, p. 8, citing Gailey, 1993) note that tough female characters in the video games are portrayed as “dangerous, lower-class and, like males in the games, sexually mature”. In other words, the video game developers seem to indicate that if women have to choose to play the tough street roles, then they have to be tough enough to take the punches and insults thrown to them by the men; if not, they are better off playing the sexist roles. Notably, the construed gender roles in video games have not gone unnoticed; feminists feel that the sexual roles given to female characters are not only degrading, but also offensive to the feminist cause. One of the reactions to the gender stereotypes in the video games was the creation of the ‘girl’s game movement’, which is an alliance between feminist activists and video game industry leaders. As Cassell and Jenkins (2000) observe however, the feminist activists seek to “change the “gendering” of digital technology”, while the industry leaders “want to create a girls’ market for their games” (p. 4). Considering the different perspectives, would one be right to say that the girl’s game movement will lead to the commodification of gender? Before answering such a question, one needs to understand what commodification of gender really is. ‘Girl’s game movement’ and gender commodification In simple terms, commodification of gender occurs when either the female or male genders are treated as commodities. Often, this occurs for economic purposes since a commodity usually has some business value to it (Almeling, 2009). As Cassell and Jenkins (2000) and Jenkins and Cassell (2008) note, the ‘girl’s game movement’ was founded by two interested parties namely the feminist movement and the industry developers. While it is obvious that the latter group had an economic motive for founding the movement, it is not so obvious if the former group had a similar motive in addition to the obvious political motive of championing equality in the cause and function of the video games. A look at the feminist motive in the intervention in to the video game industry might just provide some insight. To start with, it is obvious that the video game industry did not involve as many females in their creation and their production as the feminist activists would have liked. This meant that women not only missed out on economic opportunities that came with creating the widely-accepted video games as indicated by Jenkins and Cassell (2008), but also lost chances of championing the feminist cause through the production of games that demystified gendered stereotypes. The second motive by the feminist activists according to Jenkins and Cassell (2008) was political in nature. To the activists, the fact that the video games did not target, nor appeal to the girls, meant that they were excluded from benefitting from the advantages that came with playing the same video games. Such an opinion is also shared by Brunner, Bennet and Honey (2000), who argue that an earlier interaction with technological devices affect how members of the two genders use technology later in their lives. Brunner et al. (2000) found out that due to their interaction with toys of technical nature in their childhood, men are more likely to be good in technical subjects and devices, while women are likely to view technology as means tools of convenience. Such suggestions could be interpreted to mean that the kind of interaction boys and girls are exposed to in their formative stages affects how they will perceive and utilise technology in future. The feminist activists therefore were championing the cause that advocates for having more girls-friendly video games in the market, something that would enhance girls’ involvement in technology at an early stage. This argument is based on the perception an increased consumption of video-games by girls enhance their use of technology in future hence reducing the technology gap between men and women. Notably, the second motive could only succeed if the feminists had dislodged “the sense among both boys and girls that computers were “boys’ toys”, and that true girls didn’t play with computers, while true computers were just for boys” (Jenkins and Cassell, 2008, p. 13). Apparently, this was not successful since the perception that computer technology is well suited for boy and the male gender in general is still widely accepted in the society (Jenkins and Cassell, 2008). According to Almeling (2009), gender commodification is applicable where value is assigned to the cultural meaning that the society attaches to the biological difference between males and female. Based on this view, one can therefore state that the two parties involved in the ‘girl’s game movement’ commoditised gender in more ways than one. The first and most obvious guilty party for commoditising gender in relation to video games is the industry developers. To them, girls not only represent an unexploited video games market, but also a market that could lead to more innovations as developers try to supply products that resonate well with the girls’ needs. As Brunner et al. (2000) note, games developed with boys as the main target audience often lack acceptance within the girls’ market. The differences in what appeals to boys and girls then challenges the developers to create games that would appeal to the girls more (See appendices II and III for contrast between video games targeting girls and boys respectively). Generally, girls are perceived as nurturing and averse to violence; game developers would therefore need to ensure that games targeting girls have non-violent challenges and that their nurturing sensibilities are also engaged in the course of the game. While targeting both genders, developers would further need to avoid the inclusion of characters or forms that offend, degrade or portray either gender in a non-factual and stereotypical manner. Feminist activists are also party-to commoditising gender, first because they advocate for an increased female involvement in the creation and development of video games due to the economic opportunities therein; and second because they acknowledge albeit in an indirect way, that the girls’ video games market is untapped largely because the available games do not appeal to the girls. Supposing that the feminist activists conceive gender as a commodity, what then has changed? For starters, one could argue that feminist activists are now treating gender as a commodity and hence are advocating to position women in positions where they can benefit most from the gendered commodities. In relation to the video game industry, this would be in the development and production phases. Once there, the women developers and producers of the games benefit economically from the same games. Secondly, one could also argue that above the need to bridge the equality in the use of computer technology between girls and boys, there the activists seek are advocating for more girls-friendly features in the video games in the hope that such games would appeal to more girls. Indirectly, this would create a gendered niche market for the specific video games created with girls being the primary target market. In the long run, it is worth noting that gender activists may succeed in changing how women are represented in video games. Video games targeting girls may portray girls more objectively compared to the sexist stereotypes prevalent in boys-targeting video games. Additionally, the number of female video game producers and programmers may increase courtesy of the activists’ awareness creation about the economic opportunities therein. Additionally, more girls may end up participating in video games hence enhancing equity between boys and girls, especially if the video games were to be considered as a means of increasing children’s ability to use technological devices in future. Regarding equity however, and as Cassell and Jenkins (2000) observe, the activists would need to find ways of ensuring that both girls and boys have access to “separate but equal computer games, equity through equal access to the same computer games, equity through games that encourage new visions of equity itself” (Cassell & Jenkins, 2000, p. 3). In other words, Jenkins and Cassell are pointing to the possibility that without equity in the video games, the activists’ efforts to increase computer literacy among girls through an increased participation in the same games may not attain the equality envisaged in feminist theory. Another indication that both the industry developers and feminist activists have commoditised gender in relation to video games is closely tied to the concept of entrepreneurial feminism. Again, the industry developers seem to have a higher stake than the feminist activists because as Cassell and Jenkins (2000) note, the competitive nature of the industry, and the limited market meant that they needed to find other alternatives beside the traditional boys market. Naturally, the girls market was next in line. To the feminist activists, the possibility of new business in the video game industry appealed to the concept of entrepreneurial feminism since it would be a continuation of a trend where an increasing number of women owned businesses. However, and maybe unknowingly, advocating for the creation of games for the girls, instead of games that would perhaps have acceptance among both genders was not as neutral as some of the activists would like to believe. As Cassell and Jenkins (2000, p. 22) notes, such a precedence is tantamount to “teaching girls to act like girls are supposed to act”. In other words, the creation of video games whose specific target audience is the girls would be equal to advancing the same old gender stereotypes. Among the alternative game forms that evident in some of the girls-targeting video games as opposed to those targeting boys include the level of technology sophistication; the concept of winning and losing; and success and sacrifice among others (Brunner et al., 2000). In regard to technological sophistication Brunner et al. (2000) observes that game developers who target girls as the primary consumers of their products have to consider that girls are more interested in game objects that interact with each other. This is different from boys’ games where single objects are perfected to take on a powerful and leading role where conquests and doing a single task completely is perceived as the ultimate mark of success. Winning and losing also takes different meaning in games targeting girls. As Brunner et al. (2000) note, girls are more concerned about what they win in games, while boys are more fascinated by the mere concept of winning since it indicates that they are indeed powerful, strong and in control. Of interest to game industry developers is Brunner et al.’s (2000, p. 82) views that girls have a preoccupation “with self-improvement and perfection” since this means that the developers have to ensure that their wins are rewarded with virtual objects that can enhance their feelings of self-improvement and excellence. In a way, video games and the discussions surrounding them regarding their acceptance, use and the need to advocate their acceptance amongst the girls just shows that gender differences cannot just be wished away simply because the feminist activists clamour for equality. As Brunner et al (2000) observe, femininity is not only directed by stringent cultural prescriptions, but some of the prescriptions are also contradictory. It is thus the opposite of masculinity, whose cultural expectations are often clear cut, i.e. power, unemotional and strength. Culturally, girls are expected to be “frail and enduring, helpless and competent, fun loving and sensitive, emotional and available, needy and nurturing, vain and moral” (Brunner et al., 2000, p. 87). To deal with such contradictions both in the real word and in their virtual realities, Brunner et al. (2000, p. 87) recommends that video games targeting the girls should provide them with an avenue where they can “rehearse and express the ambiguities and contradictions of femininity”. Like always, equality as advanced by the feminine activists will require the girls to do all the hard work. Most specifically, and if they want to be on the same level with the male gamers, girls would be forced to go against what comes naturally to them, i.e. ignore the emotions, sensitivity and the helplessness usually associated with the female gender. Instead they would be forced to take on the competent and insensitive roles that would give them the powers to wade through danger, brave the losses until the have mastered the art of emerging victorious as has been indicated by Brunner et al. (2000). The power attained from such successes would be a contrast of the sexual-oriented power advocated for in the Cosmo as discussed in part I of this essay. In conclusion, it is worth noting that whatever route the feminist activists and industry developers take in an effort to enhance video game uptake among the girls market, there is no denying that a great deal of gender commodification has already taken place. Both parties have for the different reasons discussed above separated de-personified gender and made it some form of commodity that can have value attached to it. Arguably, the manner in which Cosmo represents women and sexuality in relation to power, and the manner in which the feminist activists and industry developers have commoditised gender has the same result in the end; both scenarios contribute to the capitalist well-being of the interested parties. The only difference is the Cosmo magazine has made itself an authority among girls, and a capitalist item to the publishers by using the female body and sexuality as commodities, while the ‘girls game movement’ has used the concept of gender to advance the entrepreneurial feminism concept, while also advocating for equality in video-game participation in both boys and girls. In the end, one can only hope that the world is going to be a more equitable and just place for all genders despite the commoditisation that have occurred in the video games industry and elsewhere. References Almeling, R 2009, ‘Gender and the value of bodily goods: Commodification in egg and sperm donation’, Law and Contemporary Problems, vol. 72, pp. 37-60. Brunner, C, Bennet, D & Honey, M 2000, ‘Girl games and technological desire’, in Cassell, J & Jenkins, H (eds) From Barbie to Mortal Kombat MIT Press, Massachusetts, pp. 72-89. Cassell, J & Jenkins, H 2000, ‘Chess for girls? Feminism and computer Games’, in Cassell, J & Jenkins, H (eds.) From Barbie to Mortal Kombat , MIT Press, Massachusetts, pp. 2-45. Children Now 2002, Fair play? Violence, gender and race in video games, Children Now, Oakland California. Gough-Yates, A 2007, ‘What do women want? Women, social change and the UK magazine market’, Information, Society and Justice, Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 17-32. Gupta , A, Zimmerman, T & Fruhauf, C 2008, ‘Relationship advice in the top selling women’s magazine, Cosmopolitan: a content analysis’, Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy: Innovations in Clinical and Educational Interventions, Vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 248-266. Hollows, J 2000, Feminism, femininity and popular culture, Manchester University Press, Manchester. Jenkins, H & Cassell, J 2008, ‘From quake grrls to desperate housewife’, in Kafai, Y.B., Carrie, H., Denner J. et al (eds) Beyond Barbie and Mortal Kombat, New perspective on Gender and Gaming, MIT Press, Massachusetts, pp. 90-114. Leonard, D 2003, ‘“Live in your world, play in ours”: Race, video games and consuming the other’, Studies in Media & Information Literacy education, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 1-9. Leonard, D J 2006, ‘Not a hater, just keepin’ it real: the importance of race- and gender-based game studies’, Games and Culture, vol. 1, no. 1, 83-88. McMahon, K 1990, ‘The Cosmopolitan ideology and the management of desire’, The Journal of Sex Research, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 381-396. Provenzo, E 1991, Video kids-making sense of Nintendo, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press. Tara, K 2009, ‘Cosmopolitan magazine and gender stereotypes: how Cosmo influences its readers’ self image’, Yahoo! Voices, viewed April 2, 2012, http://voices.yahoo.com/cosmopolitan-magazine-gender-stereotypes-4065713.html Thronborrow, J 2003, ‘Branding and discourse: the case of cosmopolitan’, Discourse Society, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 453-471. Urla, J & Swedlund, A C 1995, ‘The anthropometry of Barbie: unsettling ideals of the female body in popular culture’ in Deviant Bodies: Critical perspectives on difference in science and popular culture, ed. Terry, J, & Urla, J, Indiana, Indiana University Press, pp. 231-242. Appendices Appendix 1: An example of the Cosmo cover page Appendix 2: The Barbie Gaming world. Note the colour scheme and other girls' friendly features Source: www.barbie.com Appendix 3: The Mortal Kombat home page: notice the colour scheme, and its apparent masculine texture. Skarlet, one of the two female characters evident here is dubbed as 'blood thirsty' Source: http://www.themortalkombat.com/ Read More

A look at the feminist motive in the intervention in to the video game industry might just provide some insight. To start with, it is obvious that the video game industry did not involve as many females in their creation and their production as the feminist activists would have liked. This meant that women not only missed out on economic opportunities that came with creating the widely-accepted video games as indicated by Jenkins and Cassell (2008), but also lost chances of championing the feminist cause through the production of games that demystified gendered stereotypes.

The second motive by the feminist activists according to Jenkins and Cassell (2008) was political in nature. To the activists, the fact that the video games did not target, nor appeal to the girls, meant that they were excluded from benefitting from the advantages that came with playing the same video games. Such an opinion is also shared by Brunner, Bennet and Honey (2000), who argue that an earlier interaction with technological devices affect how members of the two genders use technology later in their lives.

Brunner et al. (2000) found out that due to their interaction with toys of technical nature in their childhood, men are more likely to be good in technical subjects and devices, while women are likely to view technology as means tools of convenience. Such suggestions could be interpreted to mean that the kind of interaction boys and girls are exposed to in their formative stages affects how they will perceive and utilise technology in future. The feminist activists therefore were championing the cause that advocates for having more girls-friendly video games in the market, something that would enhance girls’ involvement in technology at an early stage.

This argument is based on the perception an increased consumption of video-games by girls enhance their use of technology in future hence reducing the technology gap between men and women. Notably, the second motive could only succeed if the feminists had dislodged “the sense among both boys and girls that computers were “boys’ toys”, and that true girls didn’t play with computers, while true computers were just for boys” (Jenkins and Cassell, 2008, p. 13). Apparently, this was not successful since the perception that computer technology is well suited for boy and the male gender in general is still widely accepted in the society (Jenkins and Cassell, 2008).

According to Almeling (2009), gender commodification is applicable where value is assigned to the cultural meaning that the society attaches to the biological difference between males and female. Based on this view, one can therefore state that the two parties involved in the ‘girl’s game movement’ commoditised gender in more ways than one. The first and most obvious guilty party for commoditising gender in relation to video games is the industry developers. To them, girls not only represent an unexploited video games market, but also a market that could lead to more innovations as developers try to supply products that resonate well with the girls’ needs.

As Brunner et al. (2000) note, games developed with boys as the main target audience often lack acceptance within the girls’ market. The differences in what appeals to boys and girls then challenges the developers to create games that would appeal to the girls more (See appendices II and III for contrast between video games targeting girls and boys respectively). Generally, girls are perceived as nurturing and averse to violence; game developers would therefore need to ensure that games targeting girls have non-violent challenges and that their nurturing sensibilities are also engaged in the course of the game.

While targeting both genders, developers would further need to avoid the inclusion of characters or forms that offend, degrade or portray either gender in a non-factual and stereotypical manner. Feminist activists are also party-to commoditising gender, first because they advocate for an increased female involvement in the creation and development of video games due to the economic opportunities therein; and second because they acknowledge albeit in an indirect way, that the girls’ video games market is untapped largely because the available games do not appeal to the girls.

Read More