Fashioning Gender Fashioning Gender

FASHIONING GENDER FASHIONING GENDER: A CASE STUDY OF THE FASHION INDUSTRY BY ALLYSON STOKES, B.A.(H), M.A. A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND THE SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES OF MCMASTER UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY c Copyright by Allyson Stokes, August 2013 All Rights Reserved Doctor of Philosophy (2013) McMaster University (Sociology) Hamilton, Ontario, Canada TITLE: Fashioning Gender: A Case Study of the Fashion Industry AUTHOR: Allyson Stokes BA.H., MA SUPERVISOR: Dr. Tina Fetner NUMBER OF PAGES: xii, 169 ii For Johnny. iii Abstract This dissertation uses the case of the fashion industry to explore gender inequality in creative cultural work. Data come from 63 in-depth interviews, media texts, labor market statistics, and observation at Toronto’s fashion week. The three articles comprising this sandwich thesis address: (1) processes through which femininity and feminized labor are devalued; (2) the gendered distribution of symbolic capital among fashion designers; and (3) the gendered organization of the fashion industry and the “ideal creative worker.” In chapter two, I apply devaluation theory to the fashion industry in Canada. This chapter makes two contributions to literature on the devaluation of femininity and “women’s work.” First, while devaluation is typically used to explain the gender wage gap, I also address symbolic aspects of devaluation related to respect, prestige, and interpretations of worth. Second, this paper shows that processes of devaluation vary and are heavily shaped by the context in which work is performed. I address five processes of devaluation in fashion: (1) trivialization, (2) the privileging of men and masculinity, (3) the production of a smokescreen of glamour, (4) the use of free labor and “free stuff,” and (5) the construction of symbolic boundaries between “work horses” and “show ponies.” In chapter three, I use media analysis to investigate male advantage in the predomi- nantly female field of fashion design. I find that the “glass escalator” concept typically iv used to explain male advantage in feminized work, is insufficient when applied to a cultural field. The glass escalator illustrates movement upward in well-defined organizational hierarchies where success is measured by pay and promotion. But success in cultural fields is also measured by symbolic capital (celebrity, cultural consecration, prestige). I find that male designers are attributed more symbolic capital by prestigious industry sources and the fashion media. In order to illustrate these advantages I make use of the concept of a “glass runway,” whereby designers are pushed forward into the spotlight, rather than upward within a single workplace or organization. I also take note of how these advantages are structured by the intersection of gender and sexuality. In chapter four I investigate the gendered organization of creative cultural work in the fashion industry. Literature suggests that these types of work are characterized by: (1) the need to mitigate risk through entrepreneurial labor and (2) an ideology of passion. I find that these organizing logics create a gendered conception of the “ideal creative worker.” Men more easily conform to this ideal since they have lower family responsibilities, are offered more flexible working arrangements, and since it is more culturally acceptable for men to put work before intimate life. Findings also suggest that gender intersects with age and class. The gendered organization of fashion not only reinforces inequalities between women and men, but also different groups of women. Women who are younger, child- less, and have independent financial support can more easily conform to the “ideal creative worker.” Still, even women who closely match this ideal are questioned and criticized in ways that men are not. v Acknowledgments I would first like to thank my parents, Bernice and Edward Stokes. I owe to you my appreciation for learning, my love for writing, and my imagination. Thank you for being ever supportive of my dreams and choices, no matter how many times they have changed. Every time I need to take a break, come back to earth, regain some perspective, or just lighten up, I know you are the people to call. Mom, thank you for teaching me how to be a good teacher. Dad, thank you for teaching me that if it’s my best, it’s always good enough. Although this dissertation was written 3,222 kilometers away from where you are, I could never have done it without you. I would like to extend a special thanks to my supervisor, Tina Fetner. In the five years I have spent at McMaster Tina has gone above and beyond as a supervisor. Early on, I knew that Tina was the kind of sociologist I aspired to be — enthusiastic and productive, theoretically and empirically engaged, practical and professional, but also a grounded and well-rounded person. I can always count on Tina to be honest, supportive, constructively critical, and full of good advice. Through every stage of this dissertation she has helped me cultivate research questions, organize my ideas, revise my arguments, and learn the ropes of professional academia. From my initial interest in theories of time, through to the final draft of this dissertation, Tina has facilitated my shift from a student of sociology into a sociologist. This dissertation would not have been possible without her. Thank you, Tina. vi I want to thank my committee member Melanie Heath. Melanie and I began our Mc- Master journeys simultaneously, in the fall of 2008. Since then, she has shaped my intellectual development in so many ways, offering both personal and professional support. Melanie, the list of routes through which you have been a mentor is extremely long. I learned so much from your Sociology of Gender graduate seminar, our shared participation in the Culture and Politics workshops, by working for you as both a teaching and research assistant, by having you as a member of both my comprehensive exam committees and my PhD committee, and from informal conversations over coffee, drinks, and dinners. Thank you for offering consistently helpful feedback, challenging theoretical questions, and countless other insights. Neil McLaughlin has also been an enormously helpful committee member and mentor. Neil has challenged me to think about what it means to be an intellectual and a sociologist. As his teaching assistant, his student of contemporary sociological theory, his collaborator on exciting research, an attendee of his salons, and his student more generally, I cannot count the ways that Neil has helped shaped my graduate student experience for the better. His useful feedback on every piece of this dissertation has been both timely and thoughtful. More than that, he has made sure that I never lost “emotional energy,” and for that I am extremely grateful. There are several other professors at McMaster to whom I must extend my gratitude. Thank you to Peter Archibald for welcoming us to Hamilton and to McMaster, as well as for your continued enthusiasm and willingness to discuss intellectual ideas and research. Thank you to Charlene Miall, Scott Davies, and Art Budros for your challenging and stim- ulating seminars. I learned so much from each of you and I feel I am a more well-read and well-rounded sociologist because I was lucky enough to take part in your courses. Thank vii you also to David Young for giving me the opportunity to work with you on your research when I was an MA student and for helping hone my research skills. I would like to thank my former professors from Memorial University, especially Stephen Riggins, Ailsa Craig, and Stephen Crocker. It was in your courses that I was bitten by the “sociology bug” and learned to love theory. Your support, advice, feedback, and encour- agement have meant more than you know. Thanks to my grad school peers and Ontario friends: Steph Howells and Scott Shipton, Becky Casey, Darren Cyr, Arthur McLuhan and Kyria Knibb, Linda Quirke, Iga Mer- gler and Tamás Nagypál, Kosar Karimi Pour and Sara Mousazadeh, Rachel Barken and Steve Betts, Emily Milne, Diana Zawadski, and Kyle Siler. Nor would I have been able to complete this research without the friendship of my some of my dearest non-sociology friends and friends from the beautiful rock I call home. Thank you Jen Duff and Dominic Rosa-Bian, Christina Barfitt, Meghan Hollett, Kathryn Banoub, Colette Moores, Candace Whalen, Liza Abbott, Scott Royle, Ivan Cohen, Robert Escott, and Elin Stocke. Thank you to my sister Vicki for helping set me on my journey to grad school. Ironically, by helping me move farther away to pursue this degree, you and I grew closer together. Thank you to my brother Andrew for being a supportive and proud big brother all these years. Thank you also to my siblings-in-law (Melanie, Teresa, Mary, and Kathleen) for your support. And thank you to my nephew Matthew for bringing excitement and hilarity to what were sometimes quite boring days spent in front of a computer. Thank you to the McLevey’s for welcoming me to your family and for supporting John and I through our grad school experience. Last but not least, thank you John. There are not enough words to describe the million ways you have shaped me personally and professionally but I want to specifically thank viii you for the countless hours we’ve spent discussing the data, ideas, analysis, and arguments presented in the pages of this dissertation. When I was excited about an idea you got excited with me. When I was stressed or struggling to make sense of it all, you helped me never to give up. You are my partner, my collaborator, my sounding board, my sanity, my guts, my “husbo,” and my best friend.

Load more