During this study, they looked at 10 magazines in total: 5 which are targeted towards women and 5 towards men. This is a little old study because it was from November to December of 2006. They analyzed the covers of all these magazines and wanted to see how gender, body image, sexuality, and race are portrayed in popular media.
One of the main things this investigation found was that when it comes to racial diversity, there were only 2 magazines where there were people on the cover that were not white, which led to the conclusion that whiteness was the standard or expected.
There is also the way gender roles are portrayed, such as women being seen as decorations and put in positions that please the reader; a strong emphasis on beauty and perfection, with a sense of grooming; and, at times, direct eye contact. Men are seen in a more active, dominant, confident, and masculine way, and they often do not make eye contact with the camera.
There was also the issue of sexuality, and straight people are assumed or portrayed in all of the magazines. Women were shown as sexual objects and are there to please men; a lot of sexualized headlines in different magazines.
There are body image ideals depending on the gender; women are seen as being very thin and toned abs, looking like a standard model, and having their makeup, hair, and grooming done as well. For men, they are seen as masculine, with a lot of muscle and “buff” bodies. There was also a large amount of body modification with doing or representing diets such as keto or the master challenge, etc.
In women’s magazines, there were more sexual phrases instead of in men’s, but they both talk about bodies and have gender stereotypes between most of them.
When it comes to female magazines, they look more at traditional beauty standards, and there is a direct link with body dissatisfaction and eating habits, and men really are focused on muscle and getting larger. In general, there is very little diversity among the men and women shown.
I read this paper, but I don’t think it is one of the sources I want to look more closely at because it feels as if it is a bit general and does not have a lot of depth and testing, and I want to look at information where I might have more updated information since this was based on 20 years ago. However, it does reinforce information I already thought I knew.
Leave a Reply