Competing Gender Discourses: A Multi-modal Analysis of Gender Representations and Femininity in a Philippine Magazine

Katrina Ninfa Topacio*
Department of English Language Studies, University of the Philippines, Diliman.
Periodicity:December - February'2020


Recent studies in gender representation tackle issues that no longer deal with the under representation, invisibility, powerlessness, and silence of women in the media. Hence, it is aim of this study to analyze women's representation in a new light following the principles of feminism of difference. This study sought to prove that competing gender discourses and the notion of varying femininities are discursive practices that can be observed as strategies in representation in modern magazines. To prove this, multimodal analysis was used to analyze the verbal and non-verbal text of the magazine in question. Moreover, feminist critical analysis was applied to see how the use of diverse and competing discourses in the magazine are intertwined with the text producer's consumerist agenda. The analysis also shows how seemingly neutral or harmless discussions about feminine activities are actually embedded with biased ideologies about gender. A critical discourse analysis is deemed important in raising the awareness of readers regarding this manipulative process. It is through a critical look into language and discourse that one may find how unequal power relations do exist in social discourse.


Language and Gender, multimodality, gender representation, critical discourse analysis.

How to Cite this Article?

Topacio, K. N. (2020). Competing Gender Discourses: A Multi-modal Analysis of Gender Representations and Femininity in a Philippine Magazine. i-manager's Journal on Humanities & Social Sciences, 1(2), 19-39.


[4]. Coates, J. (1998). ‘Thank God I’m a Woman’: The construction of differing femininities. The Feminist Critique of Language: A Reader. (2nd ed.) London: Routledge, 297-320.
[5]. Conradie, M. (2013). Lingual primitives and critical discourse analysis: A case of gender ideology in cosmopolitan. Acta Academica, 45(1), 1-25.
[8] Dressed for Anything. (2017, July). Good Housekeeping Philippines, 46-51.
[9]. Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.
[10]. Family Time. (2017, July). Good Housekeeping Philippines, p. 82.
[12]. Gallagher, M. (2015). Media and the representation of gender. In Carter, C., Steiner, L. & McLaughlin. L. (Eds.) The Routledge Companion to Media and Gender. Routledge: London.
[13]. Gomez-Limchoc, K. (2017, July). My book of 40. Good Housekeeping Philippines, p. 84.
[14]. Goffman, E. (1979). Gender Advertisements. Harper & Row: New York.
[19]. Johnston, J., & Taylor, J. (2008). Feminist consumerism and fat activists: A comparative study of grassroots activism and the dove real beauty campaign. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 33(4), 941-966.
[20] Kress, G. R. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Taylor & Francis.
[21]. Kress, G. R., & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd edn.). Routledge.
[23]. Lakoff, G. (2006). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In cognitive linguistics: Basic Readings. Mouton de Gruyter: New York.
[24]. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we Live. University of Chicago Press.
[25]. Machin, D. & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis. Sage: London.
[27]. McLoughlin, L. (2017). A critical discourse analysis of South Asian women’s magazines: Undercover Beauty. Palgrave Macmillan: London.
[28]. Modern Mama. (2017, August). Good Housekeeping Philippines, pp.48-63.
[29]. Montiel, A. V. (2014). Violence against women and media: Advancements and challenges of research and political agenda. In Media and Gender: A Scholarly Agenda for the Global Alliance on Media and Gender. UNESCO: France.
[30]. Mills, S. (1995). Feminist Stylistics. Routledge: London.
[31]. Mills, S. (1992). Knowing your place: A marxist feminist stylistic analysis. Language, Text and Context: Essays in Stylistics, New York: Routledge (Pp. 182-205).
[32] Miranda, R. (2017). Your body. Good Housekeeping Philippines, 31-33.
[33]. McConell-Ginet, S. (1998). The sexual (re)production of meaning: A discourse-based theory. In Cameron, D. (Ed). The Feminist Critique of Language: A Reader, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
[35]. Mooney, A. et al. (2011). Language, Society and Power (3rd ed.). Routledge: London.
[37]. Philips, L. & Jorgensen (2002). Discourse analysis as theory ad method. SAGE.
[39]. Rotman, D. (2006). Separate spheres? Beyond the dichotomies of domesticity. Current Anthropology, 47(4), 666-674.
[41]. Talbot, M. (2010). Language and Gender (2nd ed.) Polity Press: UK.
[42]. Talbot, M. (2013). The construction of gender in a teenage magazine. In Faiclough, N. (Ed.) Critical Language Awareness. Routledge: London.
[44] Terol, N. (2017, August). The power of cut and paste. Good Housekeeping Philippines, 88.
[45]. Topacio, K. N. M. (2020). Representing the Modern Flipino Housewife: Presuppositions in Good Housekeeping Magazine Philippines. Asian Women, 36(3), 49-70
[47] Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.