This magazine article represents women as:
- Conceited
- Dependant
- Stupid
Firstly, this Magazine represents women as conceited. This magazine epitomises the opinion that women only care about looks and men. Since this whole article is based on 'getting a man,' it demonstrates to everyone (Including young, impressionable girls) that women prioritise dating. The magazine gives tips on how to 'seem' interested in what the men are doing, e.g. talking about NFL.
Secondly, this Magazine article represents women as dependant. The article is about how to get a boy to like you. If women weren't seen as dependant, then why would we need an article like this? There is a whole paragraph in the article about how you shouldn't 'smother' your man. "There's a fine line between being enthusiastic and being a stalker. Inviting yourself to all of his soccer games for the season will just be plain annoying." This magazine is trying to say that women can't/shouldn't be without a guy and that they shouldn't be around them too much because it might term them off. Why are women subjected to reading an article about how to get a man, and then told that they shouldn't spend too much time with him?
Lastly, this magazine article represents women as stupid. The fact that they made a whole article about the simple steps of going to a party with confidence offends me. If every woman needs an article on how to get a guy to like them, then there is no hope for the world. Stupidity is subjected to women because of the generalisation about girls constantly needing a guy. The magazine also generalises men. Some men love to spend a lot of their time with women, whilst other men don't even like women at all. The magazine doesn't take this into consideration though.
This magazine article represents women as conceited, dependant and stupid because it epitomises the generalisation that women only need a man in their life.
No comments:
Post a Comment