The problem comes when 1) that ideal is very narrowly defined
The average ideal will always be narrowly defined. I am uncertain how you get around that fact. That is why a diverse media which is capable of existing without securing only the broadest cross-section is better than the corporate-feudal model we are entering.
2) women are heavily pressured by the culture to meet that narrowly-defined ideal and are heavily rewarded when they do meet it,
That is part of the progressive movement's effects in the US. Perfection to a common standard or failure. I agree it is a problem and the first part of the solution is to reject the mindset championed fron the late 1800s by conservative and liberal groups alike that society can figure out what is best for humans and humans must meet that goal.
That includes traditional feminists which accepted most of the patriarchal premises, and today forces women to see themselves as victims and essentially feeds women ego boosters if they see themselves as victims.
3) There is a multi-billion dollar industry devoted to helping women meet that goal, including helping them think that spending huge sums of money to take drastic, life-threatening measures to try to attain the unattainable is perfectly normal.
That's a market. If a woman decides to believe what others tell her, rather than thinking for herself, then that is her problem.
I am not about to buy into the "magazines made me do it" argument. You are beginning to cross the line into full blown advocacy that censorship should be allowed because reading something will cause people to do things they would not ordinarily do.
Are you seriously going to blame a 9 year old girl for thinking she needs to lose weight when the hottest, most successful teen stars are the Olsen twins? Are you going to criticise her for not knowing the difference between fantasy and reality?
Yes and no. If she sees all these stars and no other stars then I wonder what kind of environment her parents are giving her. If she cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality then I wonder what kind of environment her parents are giving her.
Yes, it is her issue that she cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality and so thinks she must find value in one aspect of her life and that being a select group of fantasy images. No she is not solely to blame at 9 years old for having this problem, because she should be provided with an environment which helps her discern fantasy from reality.
The magazines and media are not to blame.
We need look no further than capitalism for the reason. Didn't you read the post from someone else in this thread which said that we are starting to see more body dissatisfaction among women in Asian cultures since the advent of Western-style marketing and advertising in their media?
Yeah... right. I agree that there is a growing business in feeling disatisfied with being human. Everything is wrong. How you eat, if you smoke, if you don't exercise, if you exercise to much etc etc etc.
Businesses are in the business of selling their products, and so much advertising is based on the idea of making one feel inadequate in some way.
However capitalism does not equal shucksterism, and neither does it equal forcing any particular ideal. Frankly if profit was everythingm they'd all be better off saying really grossly overweight people, though in a particular range, are the healthiest and then selling all the products to counter the symptoms which will develop from ill health.
They are simply keying in to potential markets and seeing what works and what doesn't. Those that aren't part of the public's idea of ideal, simply won't fly.
In any case, this still comes from the Progressive movement, our public obsession with getting everyone perfect and that to a public accepted standard. I'm sorry that capitalism found a way to market on that, but that is where it came from in the US.
As far as the Asia stats go, I find this a bit strange. I guess I'd like to see the data since I have yet to see one social study quoted properly at EvC... or any good social study quoted at EvC.
Women in Asia have been especially subservient to men and caring about their looks long before capitalism hit that area. Footbinding was an especially crippling way to make one look "attractive" and women did it for ages in China.
we are essentially debating perceptions, which are unique to each of us.
Our perceptions of who we are and what the world is like is unique to each of us. However what role Playboy plays in the market, and how it can influence perceptions is not. Neither is the historical record regarding the Progressive movement and its lasting impacts on US society.
This is especially true of its effects on a section of the feminist movement which itself has used capitalist advertising techniques to sell itself by victimizing women and convincing them that they are the way to remove feelings of unworth set upon them by the rest of society and its imagery. Don't you get that that is what is being said? You are made the victim, convinced to play that role, so that you can submit to their cure? It is pure snakeoil.
I am pretty damn sure if conservatives came in and said that violence in the media causes people to kill each other, or that communist literature makes people become communists, you would be against this argument. But that is the same argument as men's magazines and capitalist media make you unhappy with your body and a slave to a false ideal.
I mean how can you not see that?
I find that you have been particularly unsympathetic and unresponsive to the fact that girls and women are bombarded with many millions of messages over their entire lifetimes regarding the inadequacy of their bodies and that Playboy is a sizable part of perpetuating that culture.
Oh, is that how I am going to be judged? Because I am unsympathetic and unresponsive to emotional appeals? I am simply trying to get to the facts and weed through the BS. If that makes me seem callous so be it.
If you cannot recognize the hyperbolic commentary you just supplied above regarding the amounts of messages "girls and women" are bombarded with, then you are the one making an error.
If you cannot tell that your argument that such material must cause a change against ones will is the same as all other arguments along the same line, and which you would likely reject, then you are the one making the error.
If you cannot tell the Playboy is just one piece in all of media, and actually has been falling somewhat with the advent of more free content publishers (most notably the internet), then you are in error. This is especially true if you mistake its iconic status as a provider of erotic imagery as somehow an authority telling people they must look a certain way... and that it is always underweight blonde haired girls.
If people are following strict ideals and feeling failures because they do not achieve it, then the problem is that and not the ideals being broadcast. I have sympathy with people suffering from that problem. Not having been beautiful and well outside the standard of "winner" for girls, and reinforced by media imagery, I have known suffering of that kind. I also am trying to reject that culture.
It starts by recognizing the problem... the culture of believing its hype and demanding ideal or failuer... and not the ideals that people might not fit.
I suppose the nice thing about the past is that the ideals were always embodied by gods. It was hard to feel bad about not reaching those heights. Now we feel that we ourselves can become gods, we are thus deluded, and so are to blame when we don't reach that status. That delusion comes not from the press, but from instruction by our parents and society at large. It is the environment we live in.
holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
™ Version 4.2