« I Told You So | Main | A Little Baby News »

“The Shame Game: Marketing the Guilty Pleasure”

The latest issue of Bitch isn’t just the magazine’s 10th-anniversary extravaganza. It’s also the issue that contains my consideration of the phenomenon of “guilty pleasure.” In it, I take a look at chocolate, designer cosmetics, and Desperate Housewives. Here’s my thrilling conclusion:

The guilty pleasure is a troubling cultural paradigm, and one that is most often used by women and by people marketing to women. Phenomena coded as guilty pleasures suggest the possibility of transgression, but they actually reinscribe social conventions that encourage women to feel ashamed of behavior that is hardly shameful. It is, perhaps, the fake sense of empowerment offered by the guilty pleasure that is its most damaging feature. Eating chocolate cake, wearing saucy underpants, watching a nighttime soap: These are personal acts, and they suggest that the private realm is the (only) appropriate place for a woman to break the rules. When we allow ourselves to be convinced of our own disobedience, when we delight in our bad-girl selves, as we engage in truly inconsequential actions, we accept the idea that female pleasure is inherently transgressive. In fact, we are encouraged to regard wearing lipstick with a naughty name as somehow rebellious, and we are distracted from the truth that the ethos that created and reiterates the concept of guilty pleasure is anything but revolutionary.
Guilty pleasure is fleeting and, ultimately, counterproductive. A closer look at the lives of real desperate housewives—of real American women generally—might reveal that they don’t need a spa day so much as they need things like subsidized childcare, rewarding jobs—for themselves and their husbands—that don’t preclude family life, and schedules that allow for a little personal time and adult socializing. They need a society in which the pursuit of pleasure—of joyful self-expression and honest self-actualization—is nothing to feel guilty about.

To read the rest of the article, you’ll have to buy the new Bitch. This issue really is jam-packed with feminist excitement. If you subscribe now, you’ll get this issue, plus a year’s worth of smart—sometimes smart-alecky—cultural criticism while supporting an outstanding not-for-profit organization.

10 Years of Bitch




February 6, 2006 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/11220/4200684

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference “The Shame Game: Marketing the Guilty Pleasure”:

Comments

Hurray for Bitch! I've been subscribed for... almost four years? And I knew about it before I knew you, and now it's like some sort of connector, and it reminds me of how awesome your classes were. Hurray, strange tangental connections!

Posted by: Betsy | Feb 7, 2006 8:11:46 PM

knowing me is almost like being famous, isn't it, betsy?

xoxox,
jessica

Posted by: jessica j | Feb 7, 2006 8:18:58 PM

Soon your name will be synonymous with Bitch!

Posted by: Ted | Feb 8, 2006 10:53:19 AM

Jessica - you and I have a true guilty pleasure. One about which I (and you?) feel both pleasurable and truly guilty. And I, for one, do not feel empowered by it. What is it? I hear you wondering. It can be only one thing:

Murder, She Wrote.


My cheeks burn just thinking of it.

Posted by: sarah | Feb 8, 2006 1:54:50 PM

sarah, i consider my jessica fletcher addiction an embarrassing pleasure.

xo,
jj

Posted by: jessica j | Feb 8, 2006 5:07:11 PM

Haha. More like I take the mag to work an school to read, and my friends pick it up and I tell them how that article was written by one of my teachers, and they kind of go, Oh, yeah, swell...
In any case, it makes me happy. And Ted, you said it, and I was thinking it. Hoo-rah.

Posted by: Betsy | Feb 8, 2006 6:48:16 PM

This looks very interesting, and it appears to be a magazine that talks about issues that I care about. Thanks for the link!

Posted by: Amelia | Feb 14, 2006 12:44:22 AM

Writing something like that in a magazine with a title like "Bitch" seems a bit odd. Isn't the idea there that feminism, dressed up in bright pink with an offensive name is sexy and transgressive? And subsidized child care? Is that really still looked on as a legitimate goal of feminism? You really think that you have a right to add to my tax burden so that special privileges can be offered to women? That I should be compelled with threats of imprisonment if necessary to finance a special privilege for a class I would have no hope of joining for the very purpose of equipping them to better compete with me in the job market?

Posted by: Greg | Jun 17, 2007 7:16:33 AM

Post a comment