The Picture Perfect Woman: Female Representation in the Sexual Revolution
With all things considered, World War II affected American women more than it did men. When the United States chose to enter the War in 1941, there would be no way of predicting just how demanding it would be on the male populous. With droves of men being shipped overseas, the wartime economy’s demand for materials surpassed production ability. With no other means of meeting said demand, the government turned to American women and urged them to enter into the workforce. With the government’s encouragement, millions of women traded in their oven mitts and aprons for hardhats and overalls. Accomplishing tasks that were predominantly completed by male workers (like smelting and assembly) the ‘Rosie the Riveter’ woman came to depict a radically different departure from the stereotypical, delicate female that American culture had been portraying for centuries. From this venture, history not for the first time, but definitely the most important time, witnessed feminism rearing its head. Once the War was won and the droves of American soldiers returned home, the women were ushered back into their kitchens and were expected to maintain the status quo. The 1950s, in that regard, become generally regarded as a decade of strict, moral conservatism. Upholding the image of the atomic family, Family Values and propriety, the small taste of empowerment women received during the war was quelled. Yet the 1950s were not all cut and dry, for amongst the haze of crooning voice and the smell of warm apple pies cooling on windowsills, mid-century America underwent a silent uprising. Culminating in an explosive social and sexual revolution, the 1950s came to embody a radically different portrayal of women in the media – especially magazines targeted toward females.
In 1953, two works of literature rocked the very foundation of cookie-cutter suburbia and began picking at America’s tightly woven moral stitching. Published with complete autonomy from each other, both works of literature would unknowingly deal with the exact same topic: sex – yet, most importantly – who was having sex. With the onslaught of Alfred Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Female and Hugh Hefner’s extremely controversial Playboy magazine, a sexual revolution crept in like a skilled predator and ravished the unsuspecting United States. The aftermath left the States so fundamentally altered that every facet of American life was affected. During the 1950s, the once taboo subject of sex becomes a marketed commodity within American culture. With the onset of the Sexual Revolution, women again broke the oppressive shackles that had previously bound them to the kitchen and began questioning their place in mainstream society. By focusing on female sexuality, American culture provided both a newfound sense of freedom as well as a new form of oppression: the taking away of female subjectivity. The sexual revolution was not about equality, but became a new way that men (and women) were now allowed to view or talk about and treat other women - as sexual objects opposed to desexualized subjects. While Playboy and Kinsey may have opened up American culture to view women as sexual beings instead of wives and mothers, it was, in essence, a shift from viewing women as non-sexual subjects to sexualized objects.
With women being ushered back into the household after the war, a means of subduing the budding need for feminist revolt became necessary in order to maintain the patriarchy. Men returning from the War expected to come back to the exact household they left. Thought, it quickly becomes apparent that the women are no longer satisfied with the role they were typically assigned (i.e. child rearing and housework). This tension created a need to re-indoctrinate women to the household, and what better way to accomplish this task than the magazines women purchased. In hindsight, what is incredibly fascinating is that the silent assassin of first wave feminism was truly not the government, but a collection of bound pictures and articles targeted specifically for women.
With this in mind, magazine representation of females during the 1950s became hyper-clichéd and candy-coated. Known for their recipes and household appliance advertisements, women’s magazines like Good Housekeeping and My Home acted like soundboards for housewives everywhere. When flipping through the pages, one finds the magazines are riddled with advertisements and articles that read “how to avoid being a wet blanket for your hubby” or “how to be a wise mummy” (My Home, 1955). Seeing as how no woman’s magazine possessed a female editor, the marketing in the magazines were, essentially, offshoots of an oppressive patriarchy that tried to keep women indoctrinated and in line (196). In her breakthrough, The Feminine Mystique, Betty Friedan argues that women’s magazines of the 1950s contributed to a, “crisis in women’s identity” (95). Friedan’s book became one of, if not the, defining text of second-wave feminism, acting as a uniting cry for the women’s liberation movement. Published in 1963, The Feminine Mystique denounced the notion that women were merely housekeepers and mothers, and strongly encouraged women to participate in activities that did not, in any way, shape, or form, relate back to the household. Moreover, Friedan argued that the images portrayed in women’s magazines of the 1950s were stellar indicators of a historically suppressive relationship toward women (201). Moreover, Friedan argues that American consumer culture of the 1950s was directly marketed to women and created an epidemic of unhappiness amongst the women of the middle-class (216). Calling it, “the problem that had no name”, Friedan continues to discuss the resonating dissonance between a women’s sense of fulfillment to her growing sense of guilt and failure (230). Friedman’s study focused on the portrayal of women under a suppressive and superfluous male gaze.
As one can see while observing women’s magazines, there is a strict uniformity to how the journals represented females. The women splashed over the covers of and throughout the pages are always smiling and conservatively dressed; their hair is flawlessly coiffed and their makeup is impeccable (My Home, April 1955). The common theme in all media representations of housewives is a simple, if not neutered, one. Though, what becomes interesting is that the magazines do not focus on the appearance of the woman, but more, emphasize the duties of a woman – more specifically, the subservient housewife (My Home- “Izal Toilet Roll”). In an add for the new Singer Roll-a-Magic vacuum cleaner, one is presented with an image of a woman vacuuming her carpets while her husband and infant child surround her (Woman's Home Companion- “Singer Roll-a-Magic”). The level of domestic bliss is measured in the happily smiling faces of the husband and wife and is only emphasized by the content baby, sitting by their feet (Woman's Home Companion- “Singer Roll-a-Magic”). Yet this Singer vacuum ad, like many others at the time, completely drains away the female’s sexuality by presenting her as a vessel in which the cleaning product merely utilized (Woman's Home Companion- “Singer Roll-a-Magic”). The woman is the picture perfect imitation of what the stereotypical housewife should look like. Though, by portraying her with a formless, gray dress and high tying, telltale apron, all aspects of her femininity are bleached away like a stain (Woman's Home Companion- “Singer Roll-a-Magic”). Even the woman’s vacant smile becomes a caricature of her vacant femininity. Cadbury joins in with an advertisement for their drinking chocolate. The advertisement is a full-page blowup of a doting wife, handing off a cup of hot chocolate to her husband who appears to be asleep in a reclining chair, after having read the daily newspaper (My Home- “Cadbury Drinking Chocolate”). The wife is lovingly playing with the husband’s hair, which would generally imply an affectionate display of emotions, yet when teamed up with the implication that the male was relaxing and reading – and eventually sleeping – while the wife was in the kitchen, making him hot chocolate, becomes another example of female subservience (My Home- “Cadbury Drinking Chocolate”).
Even more troubling is a column found next to a Brillo soap pads advertisement. Sharing a page with the promise that “Brillo Soap Pads have [a] shining secret”, is an article entitled “Careers With A Future” (My Home- “Brillo Soap Pads”). The article reads like an advice column, where women write in with inquiries concerning profession they are interested in pursuing (My Home- “Brillo Soap Pads”). Yet, when one reads on, it becomes apparent that the subservient female dichotomy is being strictly maintained. Three different women write in with inquires on being an airport receptionist, a hairdresser, and a school matron (My Home- “Brillo Soap Pads”). With the friendly advice of what is presumably a female, the women are told that a school matron’s primary concern is to “care of the children's clothes, packing and so on. No one who has not a real fondness for children should contemplate this profession ... may look after children who are unwell” (My Home- “Brillo Soap Pads”). In essence, in order to have a career as a school matron, one must be an ideal mother who will fret over the state of the washing as well as provide a nurturing environment for children as well as while taking care of the children that become ill. To add, to fulfill the requirements of an airport receptionist, one must possess more troubling criteria. Airport receptionists are chosen based on their ability to, “speak nicely, and have a pleasant, reassuring manner. Good looks and a trim figure are assets ... she should be able to remain cool and collected in all circumstances” (My Home- “Brillo Soap Pads”). The way in which females are stereotyped in excess becomes a common theme for articles and advertisements of the 1950s. As Friedan says, "When [a woman] stop[s] conforming to the conventional picture of femininity, she finally began to enjoy being a woman" (57). Thankfully, this skewed image of femininity would only last until September 14, 1953: the day the second half of Alfred Kinsey’s famous Reports would be published (New York Times- “Kinsey Release Report on Women”).
Yet not all members in the American mass media were willing to submit to the idealized notion of femininity. Interestingly enough, it is Alfred Kinsey who sets the stage for the revamped feminine image. Being mass culture’s most notorious sexologist, Kinsey’s reports on sexuality created a frenzy of publicity and media attention. When Kinsey published the first half of his outrageous and renowned Kinsey Report, the tightly guarded taboo that was sex, was proverbially blown out of the water and into the public sphere. With Kinsey’s exceptionally detailed reports, he proved that thousands of Americans, all across the country, actually enjoyed a variety of sexual practices. Ranging from sadomasochism to pre-marital sex to sexual orientation, Kinsey’s books (Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female) did what no other books had ever done – they propelled people to talk about sex (Kinsey). Suddenly, with meticulously documented statistics from a variety of different people, began open discourses on sex. As the taglines in the newspapers from different states read, “Study Reveals Many Popular Ideas Are Wrong” (New York Times). Kinsey proved there were fundamental errors in the mass public’s interpretations of sex and rectified them with his studies. Kinsey confirmed to the general public that more that 6000 women are not “slower to respond sexually” and that “girls develop sexually earlier than boys” and most importantly “that there are … differences in the nature of sexual satisfaction in men and women” (Kinsey xxi). Kinsey united in a nation under the notion that everyone enjoyed sex – even more shockingly – with the second half of his Kinsey Report, that women enjoyed sex. Sadly, after Kinsey, a more troubling image of females will be exploited on the pages of men’s magazines, most notably, Playboy.
Hugh Hefner is famously quoted for saying, “Playboy was founded on the notion that nice girls like sex too”. Playboy has the biggest social impact on the benign culture of the 1950s. Using Marilyn Monroe as the first centerfold, Playboy effectively subverted a system of oppression that had been in power since the Hays Production Code of 1934 (Playboy Dec. 1953). Curvaceous and gorgeous, Monroe was not new to the concept of being a sex symbol. Yet, when Hefner published nude pictures of Monroe in the first issue of Playboy, Monroe’s celebrity skyrocketed. For the first time, female sexuality is not punished like in the movies of the film noir era. Instead of Monroe’s celebrity instantly fading, the nude pictures propelled her career into mega stardom. Playboy became an instant success, selling more issues every month than any male oriented magazine in history. Though, what is interesting lies not within the nude pictures themselves, but within society’s voracious appetite for the nude pictures. This hunger for sex becomes the foundation work for the sexual revolution of 1950. By emphasizing Monroe’s nakedness, Hefner re-sexualized a woman’s body (Playboy Dec. 1953). On the flip side, by re-sexualizing the female body, Hefner instituted the shift from viewing females as de-sexualized humans to objectified objects. While seemingly imbuing women with a sense of pride and power in their naked physique, Hefner unwittingly managed to subvert and entire culture of females by turning them into lust objects for the male gaze in an era of staunch sexlessness.
It is only in the 1960s, with the onset of the Sexual Revolution, do women begin to openly embrace their sexuality and appetite for sex (Stoehr 68). Birth control assisted in making sex a universal topic of discussion and women suddenly began to reclaim and operate their sexuality freely (Stoehr 95). Although Kinsey’s reports previously generated talk on the subject of sex, the sexual revolution was what brought the counterculture of the 1960s to the forefront. “Free love” became one of the unofficial mottos of the Sexual Revolution (Stoehr 118). By practicing free love, men – and especially women – began to openly experiment with their sexuality (Stoehr 118-119). With sexual morality officially changing, women begin looking toward sources of information to appease their knowledge for sexual information. Women’s magazines, picking up on this trend, underwent a radical transformation to conform to this demand. Vogue and Cosmopolitan rose to the forefront of the sexual revolution, showcasing women’s bodies in the latest, up to date fashion and dealt with sexual concerns of the female population respectively.
Vogue has always been a beacon of fashion for the ‘trendy’ generation of women and men. Yet, prior to the 1960, Vogue was accustomed to using androgynous models for their covers, draping them in drag, conservative clothing (Vogue- April 1952). The dresses were sexless and spectacularly managed to cover all traces of the feminine form (Vogue- October 1955). With the advent of the Sexual Revolution, Vogue underwent a ‘micro-mini’ fashion revolution as well. With brand new editor-in-chief, Diana Vreeland, helming the magazine, Vogue became the beacon of fashionista excellence that it is today (Dwight). Instead of the lifeless and drab clothing draped around the boring and conventional models used before, Vogue took an avant-garde stance and began using celebrities and popular models to showcase the vibrant and bohemian-chic clothing of the new era (Dwight). By using extremely popular and highly recognizable women for the covers and editorials, (like the British phenomenon Twiggy), Vogue portrayed the women who graced the covers as sexual creatures (Dwight). The allure of the celebrity on the covers of magazines went a long way in popular culture. Celebrities maintained a certain amount of alacrity and mystery that was continually emulated by the general public. In a brilliant move by Vreeland, Vogue’s sales surged in popularity. Most importantly, contrary to Playboy, Vogue maintained that the power a female possessed lay within the clothing she kept on.
By using celebrities on the cover and in the editorials, Vogue successfully managed to mingle and interconnect the glamorous Hollywood lifestyle with its pages of mainstream fashion (Vogue- Summer 1963). This synchronicity led to a whirlwind of young women suddenly clamoring to malls to purchase clothing and especially, makeup (Bazaar's Beauty Annual- 1969). Women everywhere were emulating the bold, dark lipstick used to accentuate the mouths of the models (Vogue- September 1961). To add, models begin to smirk, smile, and pout, emanating a playful and flirty vibe to the general public that makes their lifestyle – and subsequently, their fashion – seem attainable and desirable (Vogue- October 1967). Heavy eyeliner and mascara were combined to elongate the women’s eyelashes and give them an alluring, mysterious yet approachable appearance (Vogue- June 1962). Now, a woman’s face now becomes an important part of her sexuality, instead of just her body (Vogue, September 1966). By forcing attention to and on the face, Vogue was able to subvert the notion that a sexy, sexual woman’s power laid strictly within her body – a notion that Playboy managed to spread for years.
But the models aren’t the only forum in which Vogue managed to display women’s sexualities. Skirts and low-cut, tightly fitted clothing were only the beginning of the sexual revolution’s hold on the fashion world. Mini-skirts and bikini’s encouraged women to bare their legs and arms (Vogue- Spring 1968 (Twiggy)). Using these new, scandalous and hugely popular clothing fads, Vogue, for the first time, revealed that women possessed hips and breasts. Loose flowing and empire-cinched dresses were created to highlight the curves of a woman’s body instead of covering them (Vogue- Summer 1964). Form fitting blouses and shirts stressed a woman’s waist and hips and the large, while colorful prints and patterns drew attention to the entire body (Vogue- Spring 1968). While the concept may sound foreign, compared to the staunch and sexless clothing models had previously been dressed in, the sexual revolution proved to be a tremendously liberating time for the fashion world – and popular culture. Combined with big hair and chunky accessories, women begin using their bodies as canvases in which they paint their personal style and sexuality (Vogue- May 1966). This woman became known as the Cosmo Girl.
The women of the 60s were encouraged to dress freely, live openly and embrace their desires. Such was the motto of Helen Gurley Brown, acclaimed author of Sex and the Single Girl, and one of the most influential figures in female publication (Smith). Brown’s impact on publishing world shaped women’s magazines – most famously, her run as the editor-in-chief of Cosmopolitan magazine (New York Times- “Sex, the Single Girl and a Magazine”). Up until 1965, Cosmopolitan magazine was a widely renowned pulp periodical (Spartacus School Net). Circulation of the family friendly, yet stagnant, magazine dropped significantly in the mid 1950s due to the introduction of television and a select, picky audience yearning for a more specialized form of magazine (Spartacus School Net). When Brown took control of the magazine, her vision for Cosmopolitan was a radically different departure from what the magazine had previously been (Smith). Using her unique, visual panache for the pulse of the newly liberated women in mass culture, Brown reconstructed the once literary magazine and turned it into the sex and fashion bible that it becomes renown for (Village Voice Review).
Cosmopolitan quickly shed its storybook heritage as Brown championed for a magazine dedicated to what she called ‘the single-girl’ – a woman that was not afraid to engage in pre-marital sex (Smith). According to the announcement of her appointment to Cosmopolitan magazine, Brown had, “made an intensive study of the ‘single-girls’ needs, hopes, problems and aspirations” and modeled Cosmopolitan around those principals (New York Times- “Sex, the Single Girl and a Magazine”). By championing on behalf of the single girl, the liberated woman and all those in between, Cosmopolitan began to function as a magazine exclusively for the woman of the 1960s. As Smith states, “Brown converted the conservative Cosmopolitan to a female counterpart of Hugh Hefner's iconic Playboy magazine. She featured sexy cover models, controversial subject matter, and a hip sensibility that garnered a large audience quickly” (Smith). By catalyzing fashion, sex and advice, Cosmopolitan became the magazine of the single woman in the 1960s.
In the end, the representation of women in the magazines has been a tumultuous and eclectic one. Between being pushed into the workforce in the 1940s, back into the household in the 1950s, only to break free of sexless conservatism in the 1960s, women’s magazines have been there to either capture of enforce every little detail. With Playboy and Kinsey’s Report creating a fracture in societal norms in the mid-1950s, women are suddenly seen as sexual objects by the male gaze, irradiating a culturally maintained image of the bland, happy, desexualized housewife. With the Sexual Revolution shaping the ways in which sex was discussed in America, magazines like Vogue and Cosmopolitan jumped aboard and began portraying women as they truly were in society – sexual, beautiful and forever changing.
Works Cited (Pictures added for easier access)
Bazaar's Beauty Annual. “1969”. November 19, 2007. Online Available:
.
Dwight, Eleanor. "The Divine Mrs. V". New York Magazine. October 28, 2002.
Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. New York : Norton, 2001.
Kinsey, Alfred, W.B. Pomeroy, C.E. Martin, P.H. Gebhard, Sexual Behavior in the
Human Female, Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders, 1953.
My Home. “Brillo Soap Pads”. November 19, 2007. Online Available:
.
My Home. “Cadbury Drinking Chocolate”. November 19, 2007. Online Available:
.
My Home. “Izal Toilet Roll”. November 19, 2007. Online Available:
.
My Home. “My Husband said I was a wet blanket!!”. November 19, 2007. Online
Available: .
My Home. “You’ve got a wise Mummy”. November 19, 2007. Online Available:
.
New York Times. "Kinsey Release Report On Women; Study Reveals Many Popular
Ideas Are Wrong and That No Person Is Average". New York, New York: August 21, 1953. p. 15.
New York Times. "Sex, the Single Girl and a Magazine". New York, New York: March
17, 1965. p. 63.
Playboy. “December 1953”. November 19, 2007. Online Available:
.
Smith, Sophia. “Helen Gurley Brown Papers, 1938-2001”. November 15, 2007. Online
Available:.
Spartacus School Net. “Cosmopolitan”. November 15, 2007. Online Available:
.
Stoehr, Taylor. Free Love in America: A Documentary History. New York: AMS Press,
1977.
Village Voice Review. “Sex and the Single Girl.” November 15, 2007. Online Available:
< http://www.villagevoice.com/books/0331,macy,45844,10.html>.
Vogue Cover Archive. “April 1952”. November 18, 2007. Online Available:
Vogue Cover Archive. “September 1961”. November 18, 2007. Online Available:
Vogue Cover Archive. “September 1961”. November 18, 2007. Online Available:
Vogue Cover Archive. “June 1962”. November 18, 2007. Online Available:
Vogue Cover Archive. “May 1966”. November 18, 2007. Online Available:
Vogue Cover Archive. “September 1966”. November 18, 2007. Online Available:
Vogue Cover Archive. “October 1967”. November 18, 2007. Online Available:
Vogue Cover Archive. “May 1969”. November 18, 2007. Online Available:
Vogue. “Spring 1968”. November 18, 2007. Online Available
.
Vogue. “Spring 1968 (Twiggy)”. November 18, 2007. Online Available
.
Vogue. “Summer 1963”. November 18, 2007. Online Available
.
Vogue. “Summer 1964”. November 18, 2007. Online Available
.
Woman's Home Companion. “Singer Roll-a-Magic”. November 18, 2007. Online
Available:
