Rose Hackman Model Life Analysis

Jeanne Rejaunier’s book describes how women were “ornaments” that could be passed along to the men who held power. Models who wanted to make it on a billboard or a TV ad had to subject themselves to powerful men, who demanded sex in exchange for opportunity. Written in the 1970s, one can assume that conditions have improved and that the physical and sexual abuses faced by models have certainly improved. However, a 2015 article called “Model life: to call it indentured servitude is no exaggeration” by Rose Hackman states that’s simply not the case. Rose Hackman’s article informs readers that behind the prestige and glamor of being a model, there is a life of indentured servitude. The thousands of ads we see are being made through exploitative
It’s men who are in control of model’s contracts and bodies, as they continually hold positions of power in the industry. The unequal gender dynamic of the modeling industry not only result in economic control but also sexual harassment. Sexual harassment and assault run rampant in the industry because it is so widely accepted. Sadly, sexual assault is under-reported in the industry for fear of repercussion. Additionally, models are subjected to train to high levels and work for no remuneration. According to Jenny Brown the writer of “Fashion Models Shatter Stereotypes, Demand Labor Rights” says that because a model is an independent contractor to an agency, they are not covered by minimum wage laws. Brown writes that many models are paid in trade, and work for prestige. Many models continue to accept little pay because of the prestige that comes from being a model. The ability to become be “part of the fiction that sells these products” is rewarded in our society. While there is prestige in modeling is evident to everyone, the real struggles and abuses faced by the average model, particularly those who are young or undocumented, is kept under
The same companies that claim that to empower women and to stand for feminist values in their advertising are the same companies that exploit the labor of models. The exploitation of models and the usage of commodity feminism is used by companies to their economic advantage. Companies who choose to select models who are underage and undocumented are given cheap labor and more power. And companies who choose to embrace feminist language, without supporting the cause in an authentic way, benefit from the increase in sales from consumers who agree with the empowering messaging. There remains a toxic relationship between advertisers and women, on various levels of engagement, and only through consistent criticism and pushback can these issues be exposed and