Glossy magazines - they are read by millions of women, they set the standards for behavior, consumption and even love, they give the ghost of a "beautiful life." Despite the external "political apathy" and detachment from the economy, glamorous publications are firmly embedded in the structure of the modern "consumer society".
Lunch break comes and my colleague Katya opens the issue of Cosmopolitan. Since last week she has been on a diet, shedding the extra three pounds, so she does not go with us to the cafe, but plunges into her favorite magazine.
Other colleagues, of course, don’t change the timely food for magazines, but they will take up their reading: some in the evening for “ELLE” to the monotonous hum of the TV series on duty, some for “Glamor” on weekends, and someone on the bus or swinging a stroller on the playground, even for the Orthodox "Slavyanka". The latter, however, are few in my department and in the country as a whole. But there is a whole army of women reading gloss.
An indirect idea of our number (yes, I also read "Cosmopolitan" until recently) can be obtained by evaluating the circulation of the most popular publications. For example, "Glamor" - up to 700 thousand, "Liza" - up to 650 thousand. There are several dozen magazines selling over 100,000 copies a month. As a rule, more than one woman will scroll through each issue. We share them with friends, sisters, etc. Plus, many of the glossy magazines have their own Internet portals, which also gather a large audience. This means that we can conclude that the total audience is tens of millions of women.
Each women's publication is focused on a segment of this audience defined by age and social status. In general, they can be divided into the following categories: magazines for girls 16 - 18 years old (example - "Yes"); for female workers of the low class 18 - 30 years old (example - "Hello!"); for the upper layer of service personnel (such as stylists, etc.), "office" girls, middle-class girls and business girls 18-30 years old (for example, "Liza"); for women workers of a low class for 30 years (for example - "Everything for a woman", "Caravan of stories" and "Secrets of the stars"); for the upper stratum, "office" women, middle-class women and business women over 30 years (example - "Glamor").
There are, of course, those that do not fit into the specified framework. For example, "Cosmopolitan" tries to reach an audience from female students to successful entrepreneurs, while ElleGirl is actually designed for ages 14 to 17. Plus, there are magazines like Vogue, designed for the elite, but read by ordinary office workers who thus want to get closer to the "celestials". They even try, getting out of their skin, to meet the "highest class standards", buying on credit a handbag for 50 thousand rubles or a jacket for 150 thousand.
In addition, each magazine has a fan base that goes beyond the main age range. Even at 45, my mother reads "Liza", and my schoolgirl niece with her friends reads "Glamor".
Promotional video:
It is generally accepted that the glamorous editions indulge the tastes of the readers and do not pursue a certain ideological line in their materials. Indeed, what line could there be in shallow articles about rags and lipsticks? This point of view is only partially correct. Light reading for women actually carries a heavy charge of ideology.
On the pages of "Cosmopolitan" one can often come across the statement that since the magazine's arrival in Russia (in 1994), the editorial board set itself the goal of instilling among women a "new" (that is, "Western") lifestyle and civilized (ie. "Western") consumption standards. All this is served under the sauce of social emancipation and sexual liberation of women. In the famous formula "children, kitchen, church" the place of the kitchen is taken by the restaurant, and the churches - by the fashionable boutique. Children remain in the formula, but at the same time they turn into the same commodity as coffee or the same attribute of a beautiful life as an expensive swimsuit.
Take, for example, the August issue of Cosmopolitan
The main topics are listed on the cover: “Why is sex in the morning better than exercising”, “Time to wear dresses”, “What prevents you from finding a couple”, “Stars will change your life”, etc. As you can see, the questions that worry the readers of “glossy magazine No. 1 , differ little from those mentioned in yellow newspapers for 10 rubles a piece.
But what about the social emancipation of women?
She is present in the section "Career and Money" and its topics "Career Growth Fast", "Shared Budget" and "Don't Say That to the Boss." So, according to Cosmopolitan, social emancipation consists in pleasing the authorities for the sake of career growth. The money earned in this way should be spent on goods and services advertised by the same magazine.
For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that "Cosmopolitan" and others like it promote the independent earning of money by a woman and, as an ideal, broadcast the image of a business woman into the consciousness. Emancipation, according to their guidelines, should ultimately mean the independent integration of women into the bourgeois elite (and not through the bed of a rich "daddy"). The fact that the majority of women, according to the laws of the capitalist economy, will still remain in the wage-labor army, regardless of following the advice of all these magazines, is ignored by the gloss.
What about sexual emancipation?
In the section "Love and Sex" we meet the topics: "What I will never tell my beloved about" and "How to return passion." Actually, sexual emancipation is understood there primarily as the freedom to do whatever. If you want - change partners once a month or more often, if you want - build a relationship honestly and for a long time, but if you want - change. However, they talk about sex without affecting the emotional basis, or rather, propagating a quite definite view of it, where the keywords are “comfort” and “property”. Relationships should be comfortable - this is the leitmotif of the "love" advice of the gloss. And they should be status, that is, look beautiful from the outside. Glossy love is love for show, love inscribed in the rigid framework of accepted standards. Yes, these are new standards, but this does not make them less stringent. In one of these magazines I somehow came across an articlein which it was said that the appearance at a social event without a gentleman for a modern girl is unacceptable. Immediately, advice was given on how to find a man for the evening, up to the recommendation to hire a handsome, pumped-up guy in a special agency, which will additionally provide him with a prestigious car, an expensive suit and appropriate accessories. That's why everyone will be jealous of your "success in life"!
A man in gloss is viewed in three ways
In the first case, he acts as a sponsor capable of providing a beautiful life. In the second - as a means of satisfying sexual desires. In the third, it becomes a yardstick for comparing success in life.
The male sponsor is the image circulated by magazines for the poorest. The story of Cinderella and the prince occupies a prominent place in the plots of domestic serials, and magazines supplement it, throwing stories of "real" Cinderella into consciousness from time to time. The most striking image of this kind was at one time the image of the British princess Diana, around whom a whole cult developed. After reading about the Cinderellas and enjoying pictures of the beautiful life of various "stars", millions of Russian women go to work in the morning to bring profit to Russian business. Hundreds of thousands go in search of their oligarch, finding themselves in most cases on the panel or - much less often - in the role of a toy in a long line of "daddies".
Another popular image was the image of a sexual lover for cheating. Adultery is promoted indirectly and unobtrusively in publications with headlines like "How to diversify your sex." Often, such sections are run by lovers of sex without obligations like the unforgettable Dasha from Cosmopolitan. At the same time, the question is smoothly avoided: why live with a man in a lie? Isn't it more honest to leave and have a free sex life if you like it so much? The answer is self-explanatory: for economic reasons. Even Friedrich Engels noted that adultery is an inevitable companion of a bourgeois marriage based on property relations. It is significant that modern glossy magazines, in principle, agree with him.
Finally, the man acts as a constant measure of women's success, primarily in business. She opened a company in the traditionally male field, hurray! How to beat men in a career race if you work in a male profession? Similar topics are regularly discussed in women's publications. Paradoxically, but true: the authors make a woman's professional life dependent on endless competition with men.
However, what are we all about men?
Gloss also shapes the standards of relationships between women
Actually, the desire to “compete” with persons of the same sex is cultivated in the readers. Look better than a friend / acquaintance / simple passer-by, cook tastier than she, have more sophisticated sex. And, of course, to have a more status man (see above). All this is a reflection of the realities of modern capitalist society, where the imposed mass media culture itself divides people.
The glamorous press likes to publish letters from readers about how their lives have changed thanks to this or that article. Of course, thousands of Russian women have changed their lives "for the better" thanks to the advice of glossy magazines. One was able to become more beautiful, the other improved her health, the third succeeded in her career. It is impossible to deny such facts. However, this "best" for the most part boiled down to expanding opportunities for buying junk, changing resorts to more prestigious ones, entering into a profitable marriage, etc.
At the same time, millions of drugged women have not improved at all, but rather worsened their fate in pursuit of the elusive ghost of a beautiful life. One got unaffordable loans for the sake of new things, the other sold herself, the third ruined her health, trying to fit her body to the standards of another film star. And they all continue to live in crumbling houses, pay huge sums of money for non-existent overhaul, their children are deprived of the right to education, and their parents are deprived of their last pension rights and benefits. The editorial staff of "gloss" are silent about this. Chicken cooking, makeup and the amorous adventures of pop idols are hot topics today, and 10 years ago, and 20, and 30.
But what alternative could there be? What can be opposed to the "glossy poison"?
First of all, it is necessary to show the harmfulness of the image promoted by the "gloss". There are many diets that do not take into account the individual characteristics of girls and women and are recommended for use without consulting a doctor and proper diagnosis. Fitting everyone to the same standards of beauty 90x60x90, imposing rags and other things, creating a cult of things. Provoking constant competition between girls and women, fostering envy and anger arising from all this. All this is an attempt to cover the inner emptiness with an outer veneer. But this emptiness inevitably takes its toll and after the attention of the advice of all this "gloss" there are millions of unhappy people. All these publications are generally engaged in advertising rather than education.
Further, another path must be clearly marked, enabling each to reveal itself. Expand internally first. Instead of a total propaganda of an empty way of life, aimed only at creating an outwardly attractive image, there is a propaganda of self-development (outward attractiveness will follow by itself). Instead of individualism and bestial competition with their own kind - healthy collectivism and solidarity. And the most important thing is to convey the very essence and root causes of the unfavorable position of both the majority of women and the majority of people in general, which lie in the foundations of capitalist society. There are common problems - at work, on the street, at home. Discrimination, violence, humiliation, etc. All this must be opposed by a common struggle. Both ideological and practical. And the fight is joint with men,because they are not less oppressed.