firecat: tamala putting on heart shaped sunglasses in a mirror (tamala 2010)
[personal profile] firecat
I read a blog called The Beheld.

In this post, "Recommended Reading," Autumn Whitefield-Madrano discusses Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth and recommends some books that "go beyond" and "work alongside" Wolf's book. One of them is Ways of Seeing by John Berger. Whitefield-Madrano includes the following quote from the book:
A woman must continually watch herself. She is almost continually accompanied by her own image of herself. Whilst she is walking across a room or whilst she is weeping at the death of her father, she can scarcely avoid envisaging herself walking or weeping. … And so she comes to consider the surveyor and the surveyed within her as the two constituent yet always distinct elements of her identity as a woman. … Thus she turns herself into an object—and most particularly an object of vision: a sight.
Whitefield-Madrano says that she relates to this quote.

I don't. Sometimes I dress to look and/or feel a certain way, but once I'm dressed, I don't go around constantly surveying myself. And when I do feel that way, I hate it.

So I'm trying to figure out whether this is in fact a part of being a woman or identifying as feminine (and thus my not doing it is part of my being genderqueer) or whether the author maybe doesn't know what he's talking about or is exaggerating what he's talking about (by using terms such as "continually" and "scarcely avoid").

I'd love for people of all genders to comment on this. What is your gender? Do you constantly watch yourself and feel aware of your image of yourself most of the time? Do you think women or people who identify as feminine usually do that?

Ways of Seeing was published in 1972. In what ways do you think enforced image self-consciousness for women or people who identify as feminine has changed since then?

Date: 11 Mar 2012 11:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] baratron.livejournal.com
I identify as "mostly female" and "geek girl". In my usual state of being dressed like an engineer (i.e. clothes that are comfortable & practical & cover the parts that make people scream if seen in public), definitely not. If I'm dressed up in girl clothes, especially traditional middle class woman clothes (e.g. at a family wedding) rather than my own preference of lolita-goth, absolutely. The more uncomfortable I am (both physically & socially), the more I feel like I have to watch myself.

I think I've established that the constant vigilance needed for traditional smart woman clothes is so bad for my mental health that I shouldn't ever do a job that requires them. Which is interesting, because I hadn't ever put that into words before now.

Does this answer your question?

Date: 12 Mar 2012 12:09 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] graymalkin13.livejournal.com
Yes, yes, YES!!!!! to all of this!

Date: 12 Mar 2012 02:10 am (UTC)
mithriltabby: Buddha zen-zapping Slick (MAX ZEN)
From: [personal profile] mithriltabby
As a cis-male software engineer, it’s much the same for me— my daily wear is jeans and aloha shirts and I only worry about keeping the shirt tucked in and not spilling things on myself. If I’m in a tux, I pay a lot more attention to these details. The cut of the suit tells you how to move while wearing it, which gives a constant feedback that maintains that awareness the way something more comfortable wouldn’t. (I’m always surprised when I see people slouching while wearing a suit jacket, because you can feel the cloth tugging you the wrong way if you slouch.)

Profile

firecat: red panda, winking (Default)
firecat (attention machine in need of calibration)

December 2025

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
2829 3031   

Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 30 Dec 2025 02:04 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios