Desperate Housewives, etc.
May. 6th, 2005 12:40 pmSo, I went to the Desperate Housewives thingy last night (and apparently missed
sajee who was also there. Boo.) and heard the critique that the show perpetuates the myth of female beauty (that women should always be attractive and beautiful naturally -- ie. without visible effort; that only beautiful/thin/young looking women are interesting/worth getting to know). The basic idea was that the main girls are *always* shown at their best and are never shown actually *doing* anything to look that way. They're never seen putting on makeup, or going through any kind of skin routines. They never discuss insecurities about looks and body-shape/size.
(ETA: I should mention that Lynette was mentioned as someone who doesn't always fit the glamour mode, but it was also mentioned the way that the moment Lynette gets a nanny, she immediately slips straight into the glamour mode without any mention of extra beauty routines. It's just that now she gets enough sleep, and doesn't spend all day with fourmonsters kids, she's instantly beautiful.)
There was also a mention that the women, while presented as very different, all represented the "good" side of femininity. Although they all have their flaws, they're all "good" women because none of them are "bad" women like Edie or Mrs Huger (? I don't know how to spell her surname). Unlike Edie, none of them wore clothes that are *too* revealing, or makeup that's *too* obvious, which further pushes the idea that it's not the actual sexual practices that make a woman good or bad: it comes down to the beauty myth about being attractive and making it look effortless.
While the entire show is about revealing what's behind the superficial layer, the constant glamour of the women is never treated as one of these imposed, artful layers, thus subtley encouraging the reader to accept it's falseness. it's an interesting idea -- and yes, I see the truth in it -- but it's also a pretty show about pretty women and I am shallow enough to love that about it.
(Mind you, this got me thinking about shows that don't feature young/thin/glamourous/beautiful as the only form of attractive femininity, and all I could think of was "Carnivale". Where the women at least have different body sizes and looks, and Rita Sue is the sexiest woman of them all.)
After that, I spent the night at
in_the_bottle's and watched Stargate: Atlantis. While I like Sheppard and McKay -- and probably have the basics to read fic for them -- it's not a series I'm desperate to watch. I don't know why, but I think that like Stargate itself, it's probably a great series, but not one that interests me too much.
Then I slept in this morning, completely forgetting that I was suposed to volunteer at the RVIB school today. Oops. I called in sick and now I'm wasting my Friday. (I was going to put this time to good study use, but eh. That hasn't happened yet.)
I think I'll do that icon meme later.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
(ETA: I should mention that Lynette was mentioned as someone who doesn't always fit the glamour mode, but it was also mentioned the way that the moment Lynette gets a nanny, she immediately slips straight into the glamour mode without any mention of extra beauty routines. It's just that now she gets enough sleep, and doesn't spend all day with four
There was also a mention that the women, while presented as very different, all represented the "good" side of femininity. Although they all have their flaws, they're all "good" women because none of them are "bad" women like Edie or Mrs Huger (? I don't know how to spell her surname). Unlike Edie, none of them wore clothes that are *too* revealing, or makeup that's *too* obvious, which further pushes the idea that it's not the actual sexual practices that make a woman good or bad: it comes down to the beauty myth about being attractive and making it look effortless.
While the entire show is about revealing what's behind the superficial layer, the constant glamour of the women is never treated as one of these imposed, artful layers, thus subtley encouraging the reader to accept it's falseness. it's an interesting idea -- and yes, I see the truth in it -- but it's also a pretty show about pretty women and I am shallow enough to love that about it.
(Mind you, this got me thinking about shows that don't feature young/thin/glamourous/beautiful as the only form of attractive femininity, and all I could think of was "Carnivale". Where the women at least have different body sizes and looks, and Rita Sue is the sexiest woman of them all.)
After that, I spent the night at
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
Then I slept in this morning, completely forgetting that I was suposed to volunteer at the RVIB school today. Oops. I called in sick and now I'm wasting my Friday. (I was going to put this time to good study use, but eh. That hasn't happened yet.)
I think I'll do that icon meme later.