On page 99, Ingraham talks about colonial America, and how the father, the male head of the household had certain property when it came to marriage, and that women and children were his "property holdings." This made me think of the process of a father "giving his daughter away" to her new husband, as well as pay for the wedding. Is this tradition still practiced as much as it has been throughout history?
Also, on page 105, Ingraham talks about how as part of the wedding-ideological complex, celebrity weddings are often a way of linking romance with accumulation. This made me think of magazines like People, who give their readers statistics, such as how much the flowers cost, or how big of a carat the ring is. Does this link between romance and accumulation set high expectations for middle class women, or do more women realize that it is a fantasy?
Ingraham mentions that “Women are taught from early childhood to plan for ‘the happiest day of their lives.’ Men are taught, by absence of these socializing mechanisms, that their work is ‘other’ than that” (81).
This is a profound statement, especially given that the romanticized ideology of marriage is about finding the man of one’s dreams and riding away with him on his white horse. But interestingly, in bridal magazines and even kid’s toys, the man is conspicuously missing. Does this placing of the man as just a “prop” a way of emphasizing the more consumer aspects of wedding culture? If this event is truly about “finding love” shouldn’t the groom have a larger role to play in the imagery of a wedding? What products or images of weddings are geared toward men that reinforce the “this is her day” ideology?
It is also interesting to note that the ring, the dress, the décor seem to be what a bride is getting married to as opposed to the man she has to deal with after the 2-3 days of festivities.
I'm curious to know who actually is reading all of these wedding magazines. Certainly the core of the readership would be women who are engaged. But one could assume that once these women are actually they have no use for the magazines and stop reading them. But then who would be the next wave of readers for the magazine? Could the readership of these magazines be actually women who are married and want to re-live their weddings?
What does the comments from Monica Lewinsky say about romance in men? It seemed that the Former President was just saying what Lewinksky wanted to hear. What does this then say about romance and weddings in general for both sexes? How imporant is weddings to men? Reading this article it seems like weddings are not really important to men.
I thought Ingraham was quite critical in how she talked about heterosexuality in relation to toys that represent marriage- does she really expect there to be toys companies that promote same sex marriage through their products when it's not legal in most states? I don't know if she's saying that the dolls promote only heterosexual marriages or what, but what exactly does she want them to promote?
Also, I don't know if I agree with that these bridal magazines only promote white weddings...if we look at the bigger picture, you would have to look at the fashion world and see that most of the fashion models are white and blacks are outnumbered in the fashion world. I don't see where they can conclude that just because white models are used, bridal magazines promote white weddings- don't you have to look at the bigger economic picture behind media and those who work in it rather than just say this is what they mean?
Ingraham states on page 94 that many times black brides and bridesmaids appear in the back of bridal magazines. The article also mentioned that one particular magazine featured plus sized brides (in the rear of the mag) and that 50% of these "large-sized bride models" were black. This case fits with Ingraham notion that we are taught that "what counts as beautiful and marriageable is white," (97). The only time black models were used more heavily than white models was when the section strayed from the white, skinny, perfect bride depiction.
With all the wedding programing on TV now,in particular reality programing, I wonder how racial diversity is played out. There are a number of wedding programs that portray brides in negative lights such as "Bridezillas." I would be curious to know if there is more diversity in a show like that as opposed to a wedding show that gives the bride a typical fairytale storyline.
In addition Ingraham mentions on page 109 that wedding stories that stray from norms such as, Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley, "serve to secure the "normal," the center, making all who occupy this space feel comforted by their compliance." Do shows like "Bridezillas" serve this purpose?
On page 99, Ingraham talks about colonial America, and how the father, the male head of the household had certain property when it came to marriage, and that women and children were his "property holdings." This made me think of the process of a father "giving his daughter away" to her new husband, as well as pay for the wedding. Is this tradition still practiced as much as it has been throughout history?
ReplyDeleteAlso, on page 105, Ingraham talks about how as part of the wedding-ideological complex, celebrity weddings are often a way of linking romance with accumulation. This made me think of magazines like People, who give their readers statistics, such as how much the flowers cost, or how big of a carat the ring is. Does this link between romance and accumulation set high expectations for middle class women, or do more women realize that it is a fantasy?
Ingraham mentions that “Women are taught from early childhood to plan for ‘the happiest day of their lives.’ Men are taught, by absence of these socializing mechanisms, that their work is ‘other’ than that” (81).
ReplyDeleteThis is a profound statement, especially given that the romanticized ideology of marriage is about finding the man of one’s dreams and riding away with him on his white horse. But interestingly, in bridal magazines and even kid’s toys, the man is conspicuously missing. Does this placing of the man as just a “prop” a way of emphasizing the more consumer aspects of wedding culture? If this event is truly about “finding love” shouldn’t the groom have a larger role to play in the imagery of a wedding? What products or images of weddings are geared toward men that reinforce the “this is her day” ideology?
It is also interesting to note that the ring, the dress, the décor seem to be what a bride is getting married to as opposed to the man she has to deal with after the 2-3 days of festivities.
I'm curious to know who actually is reading all of these wedding magazines. Certainly the core of the readership would be women who are engaged. But one could assume that once these women are actually they have no use for the magazines and stop reading them. But then who would be the next wave of readers for the magazine? Could the readership of these magazines be actually women who are married and want to re-live their weddings?
ReplyDeleteWhat does the comments from Monica Lewinsky say about romance in men? It seemed that the Former President was just saying what Lewinksky wanted to hear. What does this then say about romance and weddings in general for both sexes? How imporant is weddings to men? Reading this article it seems like weddings are not really important to men.
I thought Ingraham was quite critical in how she talked about heterosexuality in relation to toys that represent marriage- does she really expect there to be toys companies that promote same sex marriage through their products when it's not legal in most states? I don't know if she's saying that the dolls promote only heterosexual marriages or what, but what exactly does she want them to promote?
ReplyDeleteAlso, I don't know if I agree with that these bridal magazines only promote white weddings...if we look at the bigger picture, you would have to look at the fashion world and see that most of the fashion models are white and blacks are outnumbered in the fashion world. I don't see where they can conclude that just because white models are used, bridal magazines promote white weddings- don't you have to look at the bigger economic picture behind media and those who work in it rather than just say this is what they mean?
Ingraham states on page 94 that many times black brides and bridesmaids appear in the back of bridal magazines. The article also mentioned that one particular magazine featured plus sized brides (in the rear of the mag) and that 50% of these "large-sized bride models" were black. This case fits with Ingraham notion that we are taught that "what counts as beautiful and marriageable is white," (97). The only time black models were used more heavily than white models was when the section strayed from the white, skinny, perfect bride depiction.
ReplyDeleteWith all the wedding programing on TV now,in particular reality programing, I wonder how racial diversity is played out. There are a number of wedding programs that portray brides in negative lights such as "Bridezillas." I would be curious to know if there is more diversity in a show like that as opposed to a wedding show that gives the bride a typical fairytale storyline.
In addition Ingraham mentions on page 109 that wedding stories that stray from norms such as, Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley, "serve to secure the "normal," the center, making all who occupy this space feel comforted by their compliance." Do shows like "Bridezillas" serve this purpose?