Economic Influences in Media and in Feminist Efforts

The excerpts by Walker and Baumgardner and Richards and the chapters from Douglas’s text led me to consider how the economy affected and still influences representations of women and the feminist movements.

As Douglas pointed out, “the country was in the middle of a recession with a serious spike in unemployment in 1990-1991; many kids, and their parents, were happy to pretend they were in 90210 for an hour” (Douglas, 2010, 29). The notion that media can be a vehicle to transport a disempowered individual into a world in which they possess the power they so desperately desire is significant, but becomes problematic when the constructions presented in the media negatively influence decision-making in the real world. Similarly, at the premiere of Melrose Place, “the country was in a recession, and college graduates wondered if they could get a job anywhere except Burger King” (Douglas 34). I found it intriguing to consider how the chain of events occurs and how the media capitalizes on poor economic situations which affect many to advance their own profits, only benefiting a select few. The economic conditions influence what is portrayed in the media and the audience that is targeted to engage with media, the media puts forth an image of the “ideal woman” which may present some positive qualities, like independence, strength, or intelligence, but these qualities are either paired with negative qualities or become threatening because of exaggeration. Accordingly, the media affects how women think about themselves and the world. Positive representations of women like those found in Sassy were short-lived and overshadowed by the distorted images and views found in most media sources.

Diverting from the media for a moment, Douglas presented a statistic: in 1994, “there were three times as many animal shelters in the country as there were shelters for battered women” (Douglas 64). I found this to be quite disturbing, but it seems unlikely to me that this statistic has changed significantly in 15 years. In my hometown (which has a significant homeless population and high crime rates), there is one men’s shelter, open only during the winter months, with 15 spots per night (the men sleep on the floor and 15 spots is extremely insufficient for the current demand), and staffed by volunteers from local churches. The rationale behind this program (as I understood from a short lecture at my church) is that men are reluctant to ask for help and women are more likely to ask someone they know for a bed to sleep on for the night; thus, a facility like this provides men with warmth during the dangerously cold months of the year, with minimal shame. However, there is no women’s shelter at all. Society holds an expectation for women that they should solve their own problems (which is reinforced by the media), but this is often unrealistic. I realize that shelters for battered women require trained staff and support services to address the needs of these women (social work/counseling background) and I appreciate what animal shelters provide, but where do our priorities lie? How can we move toward the link “between self and community” (Freedman ed., 2007, 425) that Baumgardner and Richards write about, the affinity that Walker feels toward the girl on the train, who she refers to as “my little sister” (Freedman ed. 400), and the elevation of the personal problems of women to a collective community concern? The Third Wave Manifesta has an economic suggestion: a “minimum wage that would bring a full-time worker with two children over the poverty line” (Freedman ed. 426). I don't know what conditions would allow a reform like this to be passed, but the feasibility of reforms that attempt to end unemployment or poverty is questionable under the current competitive capitalist system.