Pop goes the Pin Up

This reading “Pop goes the Pin ups” is very intriguing yet entertaining. Many of the reading we have encountered have taught us about the roles of male and female. Males having to be the breadwinner, having family going to war etc. while females were to be housewife’s, taking care of children, during house work and barely having any careers. (this was the ideal role during the 1950’s) in this selection the role of  el women changed. Leaving a form of confusion

            In the reading it describes the women’s role during and after the war, also describing the pin up girls. During the war since the men were shipped out to fight there were no one to take care of the jobs back home. Leaving women with responsibilities to basically take on the patriotic role and work for the nation. I find this interesting because women during this time basically stayed at home, but because of the war it gave them the opportunity to do something and be known as something other than a mere housewife. After the war when the men came back home, women were expected to return to their homes. They were to be the “housewife”. All of this gave rise to how women were viewed after the war. They went back to doing what they have been known to do. It states that, this role “the feminine mystique” demanded the postwar woman to be “young and frivolous, almost childlike; fluffy and feminine, passive; gaily content in a world of bedroom and kitchen, sex, babies and homes.”(pg 240)

            As the reading continues it goes into details of the pin-up girls. Hugh Hefner had a major part in this, giving his opinion of the pin-ups. Many females had a problem with the pin-up girls in magazines as Hefner would say the magazine is not for family but for the eyes of men. Popular culture has seen these women as seductive, confident and sexually aggressive females. This was seen as the new idealized women during the post war.  These girls had physical beauty, intelligence and sexual awareness. The pin ups  is something that was looked at by many men, not to say that even some women were for the pin-ups despite the negative comments issued to the magazine. This including play boy is quite popular during this time period. Playboy is also popular now. Nothing has really changed

“Playboy Joins the Battle of the Sexes"

The reading “Playboy Joins the Battle of the Sexes" was a fun reading. Things mentioned in this reading did not seem to surprise me at all. Playboy has been very popular for many years and still a big successful industry in today's society. Many males today view playboy as something pleasurable, fun and exciting, same as the males in the 1960's. Even though majority of the things we have been reading were in the 1950’s playboy was just something else that added on to the rebel that took place during the 50’s.

         Males are supposed to be married, have a job and basically be the breadwinner, while the women took care of the house work and the kids. Men were fed up, but this was the norm during this time period. Many things occurred, in which males rebelled against the norms, and playboy was one of them. Hugh Hefner created playboy for males. This was supposed to be the fun males needed to have. “It was something approaching a coherent program for the male rebellion; a critique of marriage, a strategy for liberation…” It seems as though men wanted to get away from their daily life and do what is best for them. I personally feel that there is nothing wrong with that. Can there be other things to do other than look at naked females, yes, but this is what they chose to do.

            Playboy is seen to go against marriage, something in which allow men to feel that they can get into sexual relations without committing themselves. Because this is one of the things playboy portrayed many women did not agree with it. Women may not like playboy and I understand why. I mean having your husband not pay attention to you and only focus on a naked female in a magazine or television etc., what female would be a bit upset. As I said before I understand but at the same time if it was vice versa and there was a popular magazine for females, I know they would get them too and be fascinated by it. I know I would, well not to the extent as males. Playboy as mentioned it was for fun and something that males can enjoy indoors and not outdoors.

"The Sexualized Woman. The Lesbian, the Prostitute, and the Containment of Female Sexuality in Postwar America"

       In the reading “The Sexualized Woman The Lesbian, the Prostitute, and the Containment of female Sexuality in Postwar America” by Donna Penn was quite interesting.  She explains how being a lesbian and a prostitute was frowned upon during that time. She also goes into details of how society viewed both categories, and how these groups were considered to be an illness that needed to be treated. During the 1950's, society only approved those who followed the norms. Some norms that many tried to follow was getting married, which followed by having sex, and also it being a heterosexual marriage. By what I have mentioned as an example of the norms, you can then notice that being a lesbian and being a prostitute was not a norm.
        Lesbians and prostitutes were placed in the same category. This is something I found interesting due to the fact that in my opinion both are two different categories. One in which being a sexual desire for the same sex and the other being a form of job whether willingly or forced to either do it for pleasure, money or both. The author Donna Penn describes why lesbian and prostitutes are connected. She mentions that “earlier in the century, the most prevalent culturally constructed image of lesbianism was rarely linked to prostitution. Instead, expert observers often associated lesbians and “manish women” with unmarried career women, social reformers, and feminist.”  (359) The image started to change during the postwar in which they started to link both. Physical degeneracy was one of the examples linked to the connection of lesbians and prostitutes.
       There was a term that was used to describe them which “deviant females” they were viewed as a threat to society, a "moral decay" in which they were going against all norms that was supposed to portrayed during this time period. During the postwar it was considered to be "national coming out" This was the time that they didnt care to what society thought of what they were doing. They even went public. As i mentioned before society viewed lesbians and prostitutes as an illness that needed to be cured, but why would it be an illness? It reached a point to which they found themseleves as "targets of a law enforcement crusade during the 1950's and 1960's" (371) When reading this i asked my self Why?
      Prostitution may not be an illness but as i mentioned earlier a form of a job. This is something that i do not agree with. I feel that yes society may be right when it comes to how they view prostitutes, even if willingly or forced. In today society prostitution is like a business that many people do not agree with. In some ways prostitution is viewed the same as it was during the 1950's. On the other hand being a lesbian is a choice that many people in society should realize. It is a choice that one has based on how they feel and what makes them happy. This has been a problem for many for a long period of time. But in reality there is nothig we can do about one's attraction to the opposite sex. It is something that I believe society should just accept, which in today society seems as though they have started by allowing gay marriages. All in all  lesbians and prostitutes have been a topic spoken my many for a many years, and can be a topic discussed in the years to come.
        

Sex and the Single girl

This reading was very intriguing and hilarious. It seems as though, that many things that were mentioned were quite true. I can actually agree with them. In the reading “Sex and the Single Girl” it describes the life of being single and the life of being married. During the time period of the 1950’s females were supposed to be married at least during their 20’s if not, it would be difficult to find a man. The author of this reading actually proved that theory wrong by getting married at the age of thirty-seven. Being married in your 20’s was the norm during that time period, which many women found difficult to accomplish.

      Women believed that as you get older your looks start to diminish and you are not as lively as you once was in your 20’s, so they wanted to get married early.  Finding a husband is all they worried about. The pressures that a single woman had, was a bit ridiculous. Why did they have to be married at a certain time? I believe that finding the right person to marry takes time and patients. It was said that
         “She may not be psychologically ready for marriage; there is no available husband for every girl at the time she wants one; and her years as a single woman can be too rewarding to rush out of.” (p.4)
         This I believe is very true. There are certain things that you have to have before getting married. I may not be married, but in my opinion I feel like you have to have the mindset of being ready to be committed to one person, and as mentioned before know that that the person you want to marry is the right one for you. You definitely do not need to rush into anything. Yes it is true that as you get older and you are not married it is like you feel the need to rush because you do not want to be forty and alone, but maybe it is not their time. They do say everything happens for a reason. For some people being single was not a problem.
         Being single during this time period may have seemed bad, but according to the reading being single seem to have its advantages and disadvantages. Majority of the reading seem to be focused on the advantages of being single. Even though the author was married she felt as though being single was not a big of a problem as many others would think. Single woman were free to do as she pleased. She worked hard, spent money on herself, had a lot of time, was not tied down to one person, and had this particular attitude. They were even wanted by single and married men. To the married men ,single girls were called the “The Girl”. Single females were attractive because they were not married.
          As mentioned before i do agree  with what she said about single women, same can go for single men. At a point in your life being single may not seem like a bad thing, but as you get older it will be a bit lonely. Then and there you will want to have that special someone to come home to. This is something many may dream about, but does not mean you have to rush into it. The right person will come at the right time. Everybody need somebody, in my opinion you can not live without them. Many may say you can, but it will probably be a lonely life. There is nothing wrong with being single, but there is nothing wrong in being married when you feel that you are ready to get married and have kids.

“Early Rebels: The Gray Flannel Dissidents” and and “The Beat Rebellion: Beyond Work and Marriage.”

I find it interesting that many people may feel that women are the only gender that has personal issues, during the 1950s. I also find it intriguing on how each gender can blame the other for their lack of happiness. The “Early Rebels: The Gray Flannel Dissidents” actually reminds me of a previous reading called “The feminine Mystique” which was basically about women and how they felt they lacked a sense of who they were. In The Early Rebels, it was more on men and how they felt the same as the women in the previous reading just mentioned. It seemed that both genders are basically trying to live a life that society wants them to live.

In the reading, the men were pressured into getting married and having kids, denying what they truly wanted to do. These men not only had to get married, and have kids but they also had to have the nice house, white collar jobs and etc. It actually seems like a lot to handle, but this is what society wanted. This was the norm around this period. Honestly, in my opinion it is not that much of a difference as to what society portray in this time period. I mean being successful and living the American dream is what is portrayed in our society. At the end of the day, honestly it is how you live your life and how comfortable you are. These men had emptiness, realizing that they put all their dreams aside to go by the concept of conformity. With this concept of conformity, men had all these responsibilities of fatherhood and marriage that it permitted them not to fulfill their dreams. In my opinion I believe that even though society wanted them to live a certain way, they also had the power to do what makes them happy. Everyone has a dream, a dream that they may have dreamt about for years, and should be able to fulfill them. There is no harm in doing what completes you, just as in the reading of the “Feminine Mystique”.

This is a nice Segway into the reading “The Beat Rebellion: Beyond Work and Marriage.” Since society wanted them to live a certain life such as marriage and kids. There were people that went against all the concepts of conformity. There were the Beats, beatniks, and playboys.  The Beats “were against virtually every aspect of current American society: Mom, Dad, Politics, Marriage, The savings bank, organized religions…”  They all were different in their own ways, but what they all had in common was “their rejection of the pact that the family wage system rested on.” I said that this was a nice segway because these groups actually took a stand to what society wanted them to do, and did what they dreamed of. In my opinion it is not the best way to go about it, because I believe you can have both. You can have your family and job and also be happy. They did not take on any responsibilities which honestly made them look bad. They went against norms, they believed that getting married and etc , was an enslavement, and that women would take over. Overall it was brave of them to go against these norms. Many people may have looked down upon them, because of their lack of responsibility, but at the same time honestly I feel like at some point in time they would have to take on responsibility not giving up their dreams it is best of both worlds. Many people may not see that, and it may be difficult but it is not impossible.

"The Problem With No Name"

“The problem with no name” is an interesting reading that captured my attention on several aspects. As said in the reading females during that time period have a specific role, a role in which every female wanted to have. This was a role that was portrayed all throughout the media, and even psychologists like Freud. This role was to be feminine, and being feminine was to get married, have kids, and take care of kids and husband. They were just simply “housewives”. Having an education or dreaming about having a career was considered to be unfeminine, and those who have careers are said to be unhappy.

 Reading this made me realize how much things have changed, in this day and age. Females now are more interested in their careers; actually I believe they are interested in both their careers and in their families. Many females now believe they can take the role of a man. Females are more motivated to do things that are said to be only done by men, because of the stereotype that women cannot achieve anything I man can do, or the saying “this is a man job” No, I women can be anything she want to be, are women minorities yes, is it difficult to get to the top yes, but many females each and every day are making a change. There is no problem with being a housewife, matter of fact i believe there is alot of work to taking care of a family. I also believe that women need to have a career outside their homes. It is a way to experience other things, rather than stay in their homes, and most importantly gives them a sense of self-worth, and self-recognition. In the reading these females gave up their dreams to become a housewife, as mentioned before this was something that was seen as being the female role.

 As the reading continues many of these housewives went on to say “Is this it”.

 A mother of four mentions “I've tried everything women are supposed to do--hobbies, gardening, pickling, canning, being very social with my neighbors, joining committees, running PTA teas. I can do it all, and I like it, but it doesn't leave you anything to think about--any feeling of who you are. I never had any career ambitions. All I wanted was to get married and have four children. I love the kids and Bob and my home. There's no problem you can even put a name to. But I'm desperate. I begin to feel I have no personality. I'm a server of food and putter-on of pants and a bed maker, somebody who can be called on when you want something. But who am I?”

This proves what I said earlier. A lot of these housewives don’t know who they are, and feel as if they have no life outside their families. As I said before there is nothing wrong with that, but clearly these females felt they wanted to have more than a family and kids, they wanted to mean something to themselves and to the world. Now having a career is not the only thing that will make someone feel better bout themselves. It takes alot, but at the end of the day its what make you feel happy. In my opinion, i believe it is good to have both, career and family, and also have time to yourself to get away from certain things.

Roses,Dreams, and Diaphragms

I would have never thought that men also have problems somewhat similar to women. Things may have changed from the fifties till now. I only say that because I see men just willing to having sex with anybody at any time without any problem. I may be wrong but this is what I have heard and seen. In the fifties according to the reading “Roses, Dreams, and Diaphragms” the author stated that the fifties were mostly on romance and sophistication. The thing that caught me was that romance was so much bigger than sex. Wow something that people in this day and age don’t hear much of.

 “Romance was everywhere in New York, even if you couldn’t afford a nightclub cover charge.”

“At least some of our parents would have been reassured to know that much of our early New York life was heavy with romance and light on sex.”

As the story goes on, he explains his relationship and sexual experience with Emily, which did not go to well in the beginning of the reading. As I am reading it seems as though men were ready for a romantic life but didn’t know what to do when going all the way. This is a bit shocking because in society it seem as thou men are supposed to know what to do, but in this case they seem as clueless as the females in a previous reading “Sexual Puzzles” Because these men were not satisfied with their sexual behavior, in the reading it became a trend to go to a analyst or a psychiatrist to tell them their problems and dreams etc.

It seem like in the fifties sex was something that was all around the media and talked about by “jocks and cheerleaders etc”.But nobody really knew what to expect due to the lack of knowledge given to them. Many people actually had sex after college, but even waiting it seems as if they were still not ready. They could not perform as well as they would have wanted resulting to the therapist, hoping to fix their sexual problem. It is different how things were in the fifties, but this is what many had to deal with. It may be a bit weird now to hear because sex is such a popular thing now that anybody at even young ages is doing. I believe because now we are more educated about sex and sex is such an open topic that is discussed everywhere and at any age, and because of this many are in to it.

 Now because of this there are numerous pregnancies and abortions and etc, which in the fifties were look down upon. Women were doing illegal abortion which was harmful for them and many had fear of the law. Another thing that was looked down upon was the diaphragms which were given to females and they also were said to be “loose girls”. All in all after marriage was the time to have sex, and that was norm anything done before that as mentioned was looked down upon. This was in the 1950s, though things may have change somethings are the same.