I think of myself as being more of a hegemonic person, although I do consume a small part of my media from counterhegemonic sources. I like to try to follow some media that isn't main stream; however in the society we live in today it is almost impossible to be completely counterhegemonic. Most of the time, I'm sure we don't even realize when we are being influenced by a hegemonic source. In many instances what we think is a counterhegemonic source could very well be a hegemonic source.
The main hegemonic media source I consume on a regular basis is women's magazines such as Glamour and Cosmopolitan. These would definitely be my guilty pleasure. Although I don't have a subscription to any magazines, it is not uncommon for me to go to the store and buy one of these magazines geared towards women once or twice a month. These types of magazines are appealing to many types of women for all sorts of reasons. In a single magazine one can find out the latest fashion trends, diets, celebrity gossip, and if that guy down the hall has a crush on you! Of course none of the things in magazines like this are really important; one could still be a perfectly functioning woman of American society without the knowledge they provide, but the people at Cosmo and Glamour want you to think otherwise. The way the journalists write these articles are really quite good at making woman think they must do certain things in order to be the best. Truthfully Cosmo is probably not going to help you get the love of your life or give you the best pick up lines but that's what they want you to think, and sadly many women actually fall for it. These magazines are feeding women unimportant information and convincing them that it actually is important information that they need to know.
One media I consume that I would think to be more on the counterhegemonic side is the music I choose to listen to. I'm not going to lie and say I don't listen to any mainstream music, in my eyes that is almost impossible, but the majority of music I listen to happens to be underground/indie artists. Musicians that are signed by a major record label are under such a large contract that often times they have many restrictions in which that have to work within. The label execs are the patriarchal figures telling all of the musicians what they can and cannot do. Not to trash talk mainstream artists, but I feel many of them these days are sellouts; they would rather have more money than more creativity. On the other hand, the artists who are independent or on a small local label have more creative range, allowing them to produce better quality music. By better quality I mean the smaller artists are under less restrictions, therefore they can be more creative which in my opinion allows for 'better' music.
A lot of ideologies I see in the media I consume is women being portrayed as sex symbols. For example, the women's magazines are constantly putting women on a lower pedestal than men. They do this very effectively and implicitly. It is almost guaranteed that there will be an article on how to please your man or best date outfits. How come there is never an article like this in GQ? Also in the mainstream music scene the record companies are always concerned with selling music. With this comes with selling the artists. Look at Brittney Spears or Rhianna; yes they are both talented individuals, but I really don't think they would be as successful if they weren't beautiful and young women.
Blog Entry
Amber I like when you talked about Cosmo and how women tend to believe and live by it. My roommate one day came out with chocolate milk, telling me she read in Cosmo that the best thing to drink after you run for a few miles is chocolate milk. I didn't want to make fun of her but I thought it was funny that she was taking this information in from a magazine and immediately acting on what she had read. It makes me wonder about the women who read Cosmo on a regular basis and follow the ideas that are being presented.
Amber I like what you had to say about Cosmo and how women may follow the ideas that are being presented. Its funny to me because a roommate of mine actually came home one day with chocolate milk and told me that she had read in Cosmo, chocolate milk is the best thing to drink after running a few miles. I laughed and didn't want to make fun of her, but I thought it was comical that she listened to Cosmo about her diet routine for after a run. Something as simple as that makes me wonder what women are taking in from these magazine and to what length they will go to practice the ideas that are in the magazine.
I am also an avid reader of Cosmo magazine. I do agree that much of their content is a bunch of crap. They just need to fill up space. But I would have to say that I have found some of their articles to be quite amazing and empowering to women. I also love reading about who's on the cover. These magazines are supposed to appeal to women and empower them using tips in fashion, beauty, relationships and careers to make them feel better about themselves. However, they throw in a bunch of other stuff that does the complete opposite in a subliminal way. It is supposedly "what women want". They want to know how to look their best to attract a man and find true love, or flatten their abs in 15 min, etc, etc. And I think it's hard for women to decode these messages because it's so natural to them. Even I fall for it sometimes. How can we get away from all of that? And what is another source that women can go to, to seek for advice, relationships without encountering all these hegemonic messages?
replied to comment from xiong891
| September 21, 2011 2:06 PM
| Reply
Lisa, I would check out: http://thehairpin.com/
It is run by very smart and sassy women. Check out the advice columns--unlike anything you've ever read!
Nice post, Amber. It seems like you certainly do a negotiated reading of Cosmo. It is interesting that you argue that a lot of women fall for all the ideologies embedded in Cosmo. I wonder if most women readers see right through Cosmo's crap?? And good call about GQ and the lack of "how to please women" articles. I am also always confused why Cosmo focuses on pleasing men. How about some focus on the women and what they want?
When I was reading your thoughts about the mainstream music industry and being sell-outs, I couldn't help but think of The Beatles. I wonder if they were ever seen as sell-outs. They certainly funneled some counterhegemonic ideas into the public sphere.
Thanks for your input!