"Woman plus..." Magazines for Ladies

Magazines for Ladies

Ludmila Pisman

Few years ago newspaper stands’ assortment became suddenly diversified by scores of freshly founded "ladies’ magazines". Waxed paper, colorful covers, promising smiles, amiable female names at titles: Liza, Marusya, Dunyasha, Santa, Nataly... I could not fight my curiosity and studied some specimen... And then I found that a mere reader in me had gave up her place to the researcher. I tried to analyze the impact all these seemingly harmless printed products might produce in female minds. And I found it to be not so harmless, after all. What is the problem, you may ask. The problem is that publishers — male or female — play to the rules of the masculine game and force their readers into their paradigms of what women are. Bold examples of male sexism are found throughout any of above-mentioned editions.

I begin this review with magazines for teenage girls. Two of them — Shtuchka ("Little Thing", supplement to Rovesnik) and Marusya (supplement to Boomerang) — look like twin sisters. Both little things offer: horoscopes; fashion news; be-like-a-model diets; information about top models married/divorced (reprinted from similar foreign editions); ‘rose delight’ marshmallow formula; dream interpretations; psychological tests, etc. To be objective, I have to admit that, on close inspection, you can also find minor differences in them. For instance, Shtuchka makes a weak attempt to appeal to reader’s intellect through ‘Love Dictionary’ column. An advanced girl must be happy to learn from it that Anna Akmatova was ‘a woman of rare beauty, and she felt that living with Gumilyov was not leaving her enough space’; and that ‘ladies adored young Byron, but he kept on pretending to be a bad boy’; and that baroque style means ‘luxurious flesh and direct eroticism’...

And to comfort those suffering from unshared love, both magazines offer competent crying towels. Those ‘best friends’ are Andrei (in Marusya) and Sasha (in Shtuchka). They are always ready to give their simple-minded readers a good piece of advice about such crucial issues as how you can ‘make a tough guy’ or how you can win a heart of a middle-aged man when you are only fifteen. And not a word about future professional or career opportunities. It seems that magazines for teenage girls see their mission in training wives for ‘new Russians’ and (as a roundabout life-route) photo models. By the way, the latter is the only profession ever mentioned in either of editions (in interviews with representatives of the trade and in connection to shapes improvement problems).

‘You must have heard the words, ‘Make yourself.’ Choose it your slogan, make it rule your life, follow it every single moment — and see your life change irreversibly!’ Marusya teaches. Well, what methods of self-making does it have to offer to thoughtful youths? Self-education? reading? learning languages? mastering computer? Oh no! ‘Open the refrigerator: I bet, some sweet bit is still there! And now, turn on your TV and watch cartoons! Isn’t it fun? And your life is no longer all bore and emptiness!’ Along with cartoons, options include: to call a friend and chat with her; to make a bone-crashing salad. ‘And if nothing helps, turn the music up to the rollers! take a bath! do or say something to beat your blue mood dead!’ Here is the lesson of living for a young lady of 21st century. Nothing helps.

The last commentary: there is not a single woman, member of the editorial board of Marusya. Its chief editor Sergei Tupichenkov seems to think that women are too stupid to be useful in teenage girls upbringing. Just let them in this business, and they may start teaching girls their unpractical ideas. That is why male editors hurriedly make their readers’ brains sticky with sirup as a guarantee against their application.

On outgrowing Marusya’s sweets, girls continue their education with a help of her elder sister Liza of mixed Russian/German origins. The magazine is an analogous mixture of chopped horoscopes, tests, cooking instructions and make-him-love-you recipes. However, the prevalent topic is fashionable styles, which are understood as ‘how shall you dress in a manner most facilitative to stylish undressing process’. A platoon of consultants and psychologists keep on drilling young ladies in ‘keep smiling’ discipline so they could do so automatically whenever masters of their lives might be in bad mood. ‘Whenever your husband happens to come tired or annoyed with something, it takes only a loving smile on your face and hot dinner ready to make him happy again.’ But avoid extremities and never overfeed him! ‘The first rule is to serve some food to the one you love, better some light snacks, so his stomach would still ask for more, and remember: light and spicy, it would improve his sexual potential.’

And if a reader happens to have nothing to do, here is the medicine for boredom: ‘Chat with your neighbour; feel the power of the sun with your skin; relax in your bathroom; go out to the nearest cafe; after all, make love if you feel like it.’ The same old song. Authors of Liza completely agree with those of Marusya: a woman might want anything but learning. A rural primary school is enough education to be able to comprehend a recipe of ‘strawberry salad with shrimps’.

On the other hand, I must pay tribute to Liza’s editors: their sexism is mild and non-aggressive. Most other editions promote male chauvinism in its most outright form. ‘A man wants sex and nothing but sex,’ states Oleg Petrenko, psychologist, in Women’s Affairs weekly. ‘And a woman must learn to understand him, to submit to his desire even when it is not articulated.’

Some ladies editions go so far as to advocate and even promulgate the idea of violence, though, on the most part, it is voiced by men. They seem to believe that they know better in what terms they should speak with a woman in order to ‘tame her’. In Nataly magazine (published and edited by Mark Monusov), someone Boris Kumer classifies basic tools applicable to cure a woman from a fit of ‘female hysteria’. The best approach is ‘to take her by throat with two fingers and press it slightly until she finally quiets down. When she cools down a little, she will come to understand the universal scale of her female stupidity, and that it was the dark side of her nature that turned you into a raging beast, and that she has no one to blame but herself. And then if you are smart enough to apologize for taking advantage of your physical strength, she will only respect you and adore your manly power and firmness.’ No need speaking of immorality of socially hazardous recommendations like the one above. In fact, the author speaks in favor of the most criminal practice which is already wide-spread and usually stays unpunished in this country; I speak of at-home offense. Why not take the next step on this treacherous path and get back to the times when they used to burn women alive for any manifestation of ‘dark sides of their nature’?

Neglectful attitude is visible in everything, including small things like advices concerning how shall we choose gifts. Santa magazine columnists obviously believe that a woman is hardly capable to make a reasonable decision at all. Alex Gourmet in his ‘For men only’ voices an opinion that, in choosing a gift to his fiancee, a man must take into account not her preferences, but rather her parents’ tastes. Whatever your present is, make it sure that ‘her parents are touched’ or ‘find it useful in their household.’ Some of optional wedding gifts recommended look somewhat odd: a gas firearm, for example. Though the suggestion is followed by honest warning: ‘But remember, you cannot rely on women in their assessment of the situation which may result in its inappropriate usage.’ In short, a woman is highly unbalanced and uncontrollable thing, and to manage her caprices, whims and other manifestations of the ‘dark side of her nature’ one must rely on her parents, her husband, or police if things go too far. Anyway, it must be someone skillful in taking ‘advantage of his strength’.

Enough quotations. I admit that articles on how you dress, what you cook, how you make love, and what color of curtains would match your tapestry may be useful. What causes my sheer disagreement is that most editions addressed to women limit themselves to this scope of problems. After all, most Russian women are working women, and they need information of somewhat different profile than is found on glossy pages of ‘rosy press’ editions. They want to learn basics of their legal rights, current situation on labor market; professional training and employment opportunities, business and economic affairs, etc. Unfortunately, the market of periodicals has nothing to offer to those of women who live independent, active and purposeful life or want to learn it. Why? I am sure that a serious women’s journal would sale better then Liza and others.

I guess, the reason is that ‘rosy press’ publishers live up to recently fired Mr Melikyan formula: ‘We do not plan new jobs for women, not unless all men are employed.’ Why on earth shall women want to work?! Let them sit at home, knit, cook, and otherwise satisfy their husbands!

By the way, regular press is also more and more dissatisfied with the fact that women are getting out of control. Even most prominent and authoritative persons voice their disapproval of women’s expansion in traditionally male spheres. Edward Radzinsky, a famous playwright, publicly confessed his non-acceptance of ‘business-like ladies style’. Then what shall we expect of those not so burdened with culture? Another example. Alexander Malinin, a popular singer, was supposed to hand flowers to Nina Gabrielyan in TV studio. (Nina is a publisher of Preobrazheniye (‘Transformation’) feminist magazine). He refused to do so, saying, ‘All feminists have problems with sex. I am married for the third time, and we never had any problems, and my wife doesn’t care of all this feminism crap.’ No wonder that not long ago a reporter of Santa asked Maria Arbatova; ‘Is it possible for a sane woman to join feminists?’

Getting back to female press, I am happy to say that, along with massive ‘rosy press’ expansion which serves the tool to fight female self-consciousness, a few magazines standing on the opposite position has emerged recently. In them, you cannot find anything about ‘raised hemstitches’ or ‘strawberry shrimp salads’ as they are serious editions discussing women’s rights and duties, opportunities for self-realization, employment and social care programs. These periodicals are published and distributed on not-for-profit basis and include: Transformation and Woman Plus... magazines, Girls Require Attention (youth oriented), New Employment journal entirely dedicated to problems of women unemployment. Though periodicals of this sort are not many yet, their voice is more and more audible.

My observation and hope is that the epoch of ‘rosy press’ style has entered the phase of decline. When I see stale issues of ladies’ magazines distributed in suburb-bound trains at funny prices, I am happy of decreased public demand for them. People who are forced to live with no money for months can, what do they feel looking at pompous laced nightgowns and exotic fruits sinking in chocolate lakes? At the very best, they feel irritation, unless they have fainted of hunger. And what contemporary women actually need is a new, responsible, weighed printed word — the word of truth. And some of them are already on the way to it.

CONTENT

BACK HOME