Wife Beater Analysis

he Power of a Name: A Response to Wife Beater The article entitled The Wife Beater was written by Gayle Rosenwald Smith and published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on July second, 2001. Within the article, the argument that the author puts forth has many of the characteristics of an argument of definition, defining the term “Wife Beater” as both a man who is physically abusive toward his wife and a popular white ribbed undergarment. The author goes on to explain that the undergarment rose to cultural significance in the 1950’s in the motion picture A Streetcar Named Desire and has occupied a space in the American consciousness ever since. Wife Beaters are a hot commodity with both men and women, and have received special treatment by fashion icons such as Dolce and Gabbana to be acceptable clothing under formal and business wear in professional environments. In all regards they are an accepted and revered piece of clothing with a long history of popularity, yet why do they share a name with a hated and reprehensible section of society? This is the main question posed in the article along with the notion that having such an offensive name is lessening the value of an otherwise flattering piece of clothing. The article goes onto examine the origin of the name Wife

If fashions such as the Wife Beater, a garment initially intended for men, become the new societal norm, this may serve as a harbinger of a return to the far more male dominated culture of Americas past. At this point I believe it is clear that the author is reading into the popularization of the Wife Beater far too much. The fact that an item of clothing with a name offensive to women is gaining popularity does not support the idea that societies respect for women has