Given current security trends, what steps might CDRUSINDOPACOM take over the next eight years (consistent with broader national guidance and complementary to the other tools of national power) to seek opportunities to cooperate with China while simultaneously dissuading and deterring it from using force or the threat of force against other states in the region?
models connote ‘to be looked at-ness’ similar to women in popular imagery (Berger, 1972; Mulvey, 1975). In addition to being assessed on their looks, models are judged on the perceived merits of their ‘personalities’. Like other workers in service and ‘aesthetic labour’ industries (Nickson et al., 2001; Warhurst et al., 2000; Witz et al., 2003), models have to manufacture an appropriate aesthetic surface and project a particular ‘self’ in the form of personality and energy (Entwistle and Wissinger, 2006; Wissinger, 2007a, 2007b). This performance of personality, not unique to fashion modelling, happens under unique conditions for male and female models due to the gendered nature of modelling work and the fact that the sex composition of the fashion industry as a whole over-represents women and gay men. Although labour market data on sexual minorities is not collected, it is commonly acknowledged that fashion has a preponderance of gay men in positions of power and influence (Bordo, 1999; McRobbie, 1998; Wilson, 2005). Participants in our samples estimated that upwards of 75% of men in the fashion industry are gay, excluding the male models themselves, who are widely believed to be majority heterosexual, as our own sample testifies. Since the 1980s, gay men in influential roles as designers, stylists, and model bookers have been at the forefront of changing representations of masculinity, positioned for visual homo-social pleasures (Bordo, 1999). These ‘cultural intermediaries’ (Bourdieu, 1984) set the terms of work under which male models, especially, have to adapt their bodies and ‘personalities’. Lastly, modelling shifts the usual terms and conditions of work such that male models are in one of the few industries (along with sex work) with a significant inverted wage gap (Escoffier, 2003; see also MacKinnon, 1987, for a feminist critique). Almost uniformly, women who do ‘women’s work’ suffer a pay penalty, (Browne, 2006), yet in modelling, at every level of work, from catalogues to catwalks, men’s rates are below women’s, and the difference is stark. For example, at a New York Fashion Week show for a major American designer in 2006, female models earned about $2,000 for roughly six hours of work, whereas male models earned $2,000 worth of the designer’s clothing. Men’s and women’s earnings distributions are grossly unequal at every level for equal work across almost all types of jobs, with men generally earning half that of their female counterparts. Thus, modelling can be described as ‘women’s work’ both technically – it is disproportionately a ‘female job’ with a concentration of women – and culturally – it is a non-traditional job for men (see Williams, 1995). These peculiar features make modelling a site that ‘queers’ masculinity and ‘straightens out’ femininity. That is, modelling is a world of work that enacts the reproduction of traditional notions of femininity, or ‘emphasized femininity’, and simultaneously has the potential to debunk idealized or ‘hegemonic’ masculinity (Connell, 2005>GET ANSWER