In The Community
For instance, did you know that the color pink was assigned to girls and blue to boys during this time? This was done so that companies could better market their products to specific genders. And it's not just colors. Many of the societal pressures that women face today, such as the expectation to shave their legs and armpits, can also be traced back to the depilatory industry's desire to make women believe that buying their products was a necessity, not just a preference.
Vintage ad for a hair removal product describing having body hair as "embarassing."Wikimedia Commons
Think about it: Why is it considered "unsanitary" for women to have body hair, but not for men? It's because the depilatory industry, driven by capitalism, wanted to create a market for their products. They convinced women that removing body hair was not just a matter of personal preference but a societal expectation.
The term “Plus Size,” which is generally categorized as size 14 and up, has its origins in the early 20th century and was popularized by the women's clothing retailer, Lane Bryant. The company's founder, Lena Himmelstein Bryant Malsin, was a trailblazer in the fashion industry. She created the first commercially successful maternity dress and was one of the first retailers to offer all-size-inclusive clothing.
However, the term "plus size" soon began to contribute to the labeling of bodies. As the term gained popularity, more retailers started using it to market clothing to larger-sized women. Instead of labeling the clothing, they labeled the women as "plus size" instead. The plus-size section became a secluded category in most retailers, and the term gained even more popularity as it was used to commercialize products.
A vintage Lane Bryant ad advertising "chubby-sized" clothes.Wikimedia Commons
Unfortunately, this labeling has also cemented ideas in women's minds that they should aspire to be a smaller size and avoid shopping in the plus-size section. It's a vicious cycle that reinforces harmful body ideals and leads to discrimination against larger-bodied individuals.
It's difficult to say exactly when and why segregated areas for larger clothing sizes came about instead of including clothing in larger sizes with the rest of the fashion. However, one possible explanation is that larger-sized clothing has often been seen as less fashionable, leading to the stereotype that it must be more "modest" and cannot be form-fitting or structured. This bias against bigger bodies may have also led to sheer designer laziness, resulting in clothing that resembles tarps with buttons.
Not much has changed since the ’50s. While many brands are now trying to be size-inclusive, significant work remains to achieve actual size parity. A quick scroll through social media demonstrates the continued fight for size inclusion and the rejection of body shaming.
Models such as Ashley Graham and Paloma Elsesser have made waves in the fashion industry, and they have continuously been labeled as plus-size models when they are both US size 16. Seeing models bigger than a size 6 in fashion shows is still a rare occurrence.
After model Stefania Ferrario was featured in an advertisement where she was described as a plus-size model, she took to Instagram to ask her followers: Why is the label necessary? In her own words, “I am a model FULL STOP…This is NOT empowering.” She explained that she is proud of her body but didn’t understand why she had to be differentiated from her peers by being labeled plus-sized rather than a model like the rest. On the other hand, some activists believe the term is necessary until all retailers cater to all sizes.
Stefania Ferrario called out the fashion industry for labeling her a "plus-size" model.Source: Stefania Ferrario
Movie Star, Melissa McCarthy has also called for the term to be discontinued. As she successfully launched her own line back in 2015, she challenged the industry by criticizing the use of the term, the segregation of plus size clothing into a separate category, and calling for its ban.
In an interview, McCarthy explained that her vision for her own line was to, “Run the sizes as I make them and let friends go shopping with their friends. Stop segregating women.” she went on, “Women come in all sizes. Seventy percent of women in the United States are a size 14 or above, and that’s technically ‘plus-size,’ so you’re taking your biggest category of people and telling them, ‘You’re not really worthy.’ I find that very strange,” She ended the interview by stating that designers are over-complicating things by creating different categories.
Clothing companies are taking steps to become more inclusive towards bigger sizes, and one way they are doing this is by changing the terminology from "plus-size" to "extended sizes" or "size-inclusive." This small but significant change is meant to remove the stigma associated with the term and create a more welcoming environment for all customers.
But it's not just about the terminology. Many clothing companies are also expanding their size ranges to include larger sizes, offering a wider range of clothing options to more people. This is a big win for those who have felt excluded from the fashion industry.
Another positive change is the increase in diverse models featured in advertising campaigns and on websites. Seeing models of different sizes, races, ages, and body types is a refreshing change from the narrow beauty standards that have dominated the industry for too long. By promoting body positivity and inclusivity, fashion companies are sending a message that all bodies are beautiful and worthy of representation.
The fashion industry seems to be moving in the right direction toward creating a more inclusive and accommodating environment for people of all sizes. However, there is still much work to be done to ensure that all bodies are celebrated and represented in the industry.
- From Size to Personal Identity: How Plus-Size Came to Be ›
- The History of Hoop Earrings: Uniting Latinas Across Generations ›
Fed up with the sweltering summer heat in her sister’s East Los Angeles dress factory, 18-year-old Ana Garcia, played by actress America Ferrera, takes off her shirt. Ana’s mother, Carmen, played by Lupe Ontiveros, quickly moves to cover her daughter’s body.
“Look at you; you look awful,” Carmen says, referring to Ana’s weight.
“How dare anyone try to tell me what I should look like, or who I should be, when there’s so much more to me than just my weight,” Ana says during the exchange.
Ana’s sister and another woman working in the factory come to her defense. To Carmen’s horror, the women each start to remove their clothes to compare their perceived body flaws. By the end, they are laughing, sewing dresses in their underwear and vibing to music in a powerful display of pride in their body fat, their stretch marks and their different sizes.
Lupe Ontiveros (as Carmen Garcia) and America Ferrera (as Ana Garcia) in Real Women Have Curves (2002) directed by Patricia Cardoso (HBO)
Patricia Cardoso, director of “Real Women Have Curves,” knew it was an important story to tell. At the time, few other films had centered the stories of Latina girls and teens in the United States, she told The 19th. “Real Women Have Curves” offered a glimpse into a world that was relatable to so many: the financial considerations for a working-class family, a complicated mother-daughter relationship, a first-generation Mexican-American teen with dreams of going to college in New York City.
In the 21 years since its release, the number of Latina coming-of-age stories has increased — and so has the representation within them. There are more actresses being cast and a wider variety of viewpoints being told that reflect the complexity and humanity of a diverse population that has historically been reduced to harmful stereotypes. But both in front and behind the camera, disparities remain, Latina women in the film and television industry told The 19th.
“There’s still a lot more needed because there’s not enough representation,” Cardoso said. “I teach at the University of California, Riverside, now, and the majority of my students are first-generation college students. They have only seen themselves reflected on screen a few times growing up, and it’s usually not realistically and not dealing with the issues they face.”
One 2021 study by researchers at the University of Southern California analyzed 1,300 top-grossing films between 2007 and 2019 and found that 3.5 percent, or 45 of the movies, had Latinx leads or co-leads. Of those 45 films, 24 of them had Latina leads.
Across the 100 top-grossing films in 2019, 35 had no Latinx characters at all and 59 had no Latina characters. Ninety-five of the films had no Latinx characters with disabilities, and 98 had no LGBTQ+ Latinx characters.
The study shows both existing challenges for Latinx representation, and how the numbers have improved somewhat over the years.
Like Cardoso, for filmmaker Aurora Guerrero it was difficult to think of many movies or television shows 25 or 30 years ago that depicted the adolescence of U.S. Latinas. Mainly, there was “Selena,” the 1997 movie starring Jennifer Lopez about the life and rising fame of Mexican-American singer Selena Quintanilla.
The year 2002 brought “Real Women Have Curves” and the Disney Channel original movie “Gotta Kick It Up!,” both starring America Ferrera. The latter tells the story of a dance team at an under-resourced middle school in Southern California. The movie has received some criticism for the absence or Afro-Latinas and for repeating a common White savior narrative in Hollywood, with a non-Latinx teacher stepping in to save the school dance team.
Still, “Gotta Kick It Up!” remains a treasured nostalgic re-watch for many Latina millennials. In different ways, “Real Women Have Curves” and “Gotta Kick It Up!” showed layers to the Latina teen experience. There were nerdy bookworm characters in addition to the rebellious cool girl. Some faced high expectations from their families or experienced anxieties navigating a White-dominated society.
For years, Latina characters have been hypersexualized, portrayed as loud and vain or as very strict and religious, without much nuance. Those portrayals can affect how the world treats Latinas and how Latina girls see themselves. Research indicates that seeing negative stereotypes or portrayals of women and girl characters in entertainment has harmful effects on mental health and body image.
Seeing more varied examples of Latinas as children and adults can help young Latinas understand they are not alone in their experiences, said Rosa Parra, a film critic who writes for The Daily Chela, a Chicano and Hispanic news website. Certain characters can also help young girls envision what their lives could be like in a particular career or at a particular college, Parra said.
Addressing stereotypes is a balancing act because some stereotypes develop from a seed of truth, she added.
“Do I have a tia or cousins who are very religious? Absolutely. And yes, I know people who can be loud and obnoxious sometimes. But it’s about showing a range of personalities and lives,” she said. “We’re such a diverse group of people. We have different shapes, sizes, skin tones, hairstyles, cultures and languages. It is unfair to just paint all of us as a monolith.”
More exploitative Latinx depictions often flatten a character into a single trope without adding more depth, Guerrero said. She worked on the set of “Real Women Have Curves” as an assistant to Cardoso while working on her own groundbreaking feature film.
Ten years after “Real Women Have Curves,” Guerrero’s “Mosquita y Mari” premiered. The 2012 film follows two Chicana teens in Los Angeles as they deal with school and family, in addition to their romantic feelings for each other.
Guerrero builds the connection between the two teen girls through subtle glances and touches that capture the butterflies, the confusion and the fear that many LGBTQ+ teens experience with a same-sex crush. Guerrero said she was tired and angry about the continued lack of queer Latinx stories in film and television.
“I wasn’t afraid to do it. I felt it was necessary, and I was empowered to do it,” Guerrero said. “The only thing that scared me was the question of whether I was going to be able to get funding for it.”
Initially, that fear was a reality as Guerrero struggled to get the money she needed. Ultimately, her team crowdfunded an $80,000 production budget, and “Mosquita y Mari” was released to critical acclaim.
Venecia Troncoso and Fenessa Pineda in “Mosquita y Mari” (2012) directed by Aurora Guerrero (THE FILM COLLABORATIVE)
Today both “Real Women Have Curves” and “Mosquita y Mari” are celebrated for breaking barriers of Latina storytelling in film; however, Cardoso’s and Guerrero’s struggles did not end after these successes. Following their respective films, they both faced years of rejection and struggled to find other opportunities as directors and filmmakers. Cardoso said she couldn’t get work as a director for 15 years after 2002. For Guerrero, she continued to face hurdles nearly three years after 2012.
In both cases, Black filmmaker Ava DuVernay offered a lifeline, by bringing them on to direct episodes of her Oprah Winfrey-backed show “Queen Sugar.” The support from DuVernay helped them to maintain steady work in television, they said, but it also highlights an ongoing problem for Latinx storytellers. “Not a lot of people have that ability. Not a lot of people have Ava to be their bridge. You know, she can’t hire everybody,” Guerrero said.
Over the past couple of decades, new projects have emerged elevating different Latinx perspectives, including the shows “Gentefied” and the reboot of “One Day at a Time,” and movies like Marvel’s Spider-Verse series and DC Universe’s “Blue Beetle,” which both focus on male characters. Blockbuster movies focused on young Latinas are still harder to find, with 2019’s “Dora and the Lost City of Gold” and this year’s “Spy Kids: Armageddon” as notable exceptions.
Creating more pathways for a larger variety of Latinx people to have a role in film and television creation will allow more authentic storytelling and coming-of-age films that young people can relate to.
“So many women of color, so many Latina women get passed over for an opportunity to direct,” Guerrero said. “So there are these barriers that are very difficult to get past when people don’t take the time to really see you, to really consider you and let you compete with your talent.”
- Exposed: The Ugly Truth Behind the Widespread Problem of Latina Fetishization ›
- Avenida Launching First-Ever Latino-Owned Movie Studio in Hollywood ›
On the surface, it seems comical, but dig a little deeper, and the joke starts to lose its humor. This ongoing gag demonstrates a narrow representation of Latino men in film: tough, often affiliated with crime, and rarely given a backstory that humanizes them beyond their hardened exterior. It might seem easy to laugh it off, but that’s been going on for far too long.
https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5gfe4y/damn_hector/
Gugliemi’s typecasting is a clear testament to the broader issue of Latino and Latina stereotypes in the entertainment industry. What is presented as a light-hearted in-joke reveals a more unsettling and entrenched reality: the habitual reduction of the vast, diverse Latino community into single-note characters.
Typecasting and Stereotyping: What’s the Difference?
For the uninitiated, it's crucial to understand the nuanced difference between typecasting and stereotyping within the world of cinema. Typecasting refers to the repetitive casting of actors in specific roles based on their appearance, background, or previous roles, rather than on their potential range or talent. A prime example would be Danny Trejo, who, despite his expansive abilities as an actor, has often been typecast as the "tough guy" or villain due to his rugged appearance and previous roles.
On the other hand, stereotyping in films revolves around reducing an actor or a character to a set of generalized traits attributed to their ethnic, cultural, or social group. Rosario Dawson, a talented Latina actress, has spoken out about how Latinas are frequently stereotyped in films as the "spicy" or "fiery" character, limiting the depth and complexity with which their characters are portrayed. Both of these practices, though distinct, converge to limit the opportunities and narratives of Latine actors and actresses in Hollywood.
Latina actresses have long grappled with being pigeonholed into very specific roles. Jennifer Lopez, for instance, broke ground as Selena Quintanilla in "Selena" but subsequently found herself pushed into roles as the fiery temptress or the passionate lover. Similarly, Sofia Vergara, with her comedic prowess showcased in "Modern Family," often has her characters distilled down to a spicy Latina caricature, with her accent as the punchline.
Salma Hayek, an Oscar-nominated actress with a repertoire spanning genres, spoke about the early days of her career in Hollywood. "They’d tell me, ‘It’s a waste of time,'" she once mentioned, recounting the rejections because of her accent or for being "too Latina." It's a testament to Hayek's talent and determination that she forged her own path as an actress and a producer, but the sentiment remains: Latina actresses are far too often funneled into the roles of sassy maids, seductresses, or hot-tempered sidekicks.
Beyond the confines of Hollywood, the ripple effects of these stereotypes manifest deeply within society, especially for Latinas. The entertainment industry’s portrayal of Latinas as sultry temptresses or firecrackers isn’t just a character issue—it's a societal one. This cinematic trope has led to Latina women being fetishized and sexualized in real life. The constant sexualization can create undue pressures on Latinas to fit a particular mold, which can affect their self-esteem and mental health. This ongoing fetishization not only limits the opportunities for these actresses in Hollywood but also perpetuates harmful myths about Latina women in the broader social context.
Reductive stereotypes and constant typecasting don’t just affect the careers of talented actors and actresses; they shape the cultural perception of an entire community. When a community is consistently portrayed in a singular, negative light, it can perpetuate ignorance and bias, reinforcing damaging stereotypes in real life.
Latino stories are as diverse as the community itself, spanning countries, cultures, and experiences. While there have been positive strides in recent years, like the first-ever Latino-owned movie studio in Hollywood being launched, there's still much work to be done.
Pop culture is like a mirror, reflecting society's views and beliefs back to us. When that reflection is limited or skewed, it paints an incomplete picture. It's high time Hollywood broadens its canvas to capture the diverse tales of the Latino community – stories bursting with passion, resilience, dreams, and so much more. Only by showcasing this diversity can we challenge the limiting narratives that overshadow the brilliance of countless Latine actors and actresses.
Our vision is clear: a silver screen that feels genuine, resonating with the narratives we hold close and the community we cherish. Here's hoping Hollywood is tuning in.
