Looks
pauline
groomed 'is very strong and fuelled from an early age by toy
manufactuers. It is hard for young girls to have an ideal body image
presented to them and i would like to see more emphasis on health fand
not looks and' grooming'.
--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to femi...@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism...@ncar.ucar.edu. This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days. Rejections notified by email.
Megan
> I feel that the pressure on young girls to be attractive and 'well
> groomed 'is very strong and fuelled from an early age by toy
> manufactuers. It is hard for young girls to have an ideal body image
> presented to them and i would like to see more emphasis on health fand
> not looks and' grooming'.
>
It's not even the toy manufacturers who are guilty here. Sure, it's
impossible to keep children from seeings toys like Barbie Dolls and
Bratz and whatever else they make which influence girls to focus on
being attractive to boys. But we must also place blame on parents,
teachers and other role models. I would argue, in fact, that adults
have much more influence over children in the long run than do
advertisements and toy manufacturers. Adults who do not give girls the
tools they need to focus on health and education instead of beuaty and
boy-seeking do not give gils the tools to be whole, functioning adults
in society. They do not even give girls the tools they need to be in
control of their sexuality, because they socialize girls into a
heteronormative society and pave the road for confusion non-hetero
girls face when they become aware of their sexuality.
in any case, I agree with you. It's a big problem.
Rick Merrill
> I feel that the pressure on young girls to be attractive and 'well
> groomed 'is very strong and fuelled from an early age by toy
> manufactuers. It is hard for young girls to have an ideal body image
> not looks and' grooming'.
>
Boys feel a similar pressure. It is hard for both genders to resist
such pressures. My youngest daughter (of 4) was appalled to find that
many were "girlie girls" - obsessed with girlishness, clothes, etc.
Wearing uniforms helps relieve some of that pressure,
Nick (Nick Levinson)
* * * * *
. . . . I would argue, in fact, that adults have much more influence
over children in the long run than do advertisements and toy
* * * * *
Judith Rich Harris in The Nurture Assumption argues that parents have
but a fraction of the influence they think they have over their
children, because peers have nearly a lion's share.
Which makes the job of widening the choices females see are personally
realistic and attainable even more difficult.
-- Nick
Nick (Nick Levinson)
* * * * *
and 'well groomed '"]
* * * * *
I'm not sure. Prisons and Roman Catholic schools are big on uniforms.
What many prisoners and students do is modify their uniforms in ways
too difficult for administrators to control. The standard uniform is
the backdrop against which even small modifications stand out to other
prisoners and students. To you as an outside civilian, there's an
orange jumpsuit; to the many prisoners in a courtyard who are all
wearing orange jumpsuits, the tear in the lapel is much more obvious.
Stern control is largely irrelevant; in a Cuban prison,
hardly-political womyn shortened their skirts and altered their shirts,
and political prisoners got needle and thread and sewed group
identities onto their uniforms. The latter got beaten up for it, but
constantly repairing uniforms is expensive and usually some small
modifications will go unnoticed by those in charge.
The main good argument I see favoring uniforms for schoolchildren is
that the money spent on brand-name non-uniform clothing is economically
too disruptive to many of the families. When I hear of foster children
complaining that $80 a month is too little for clothing and I don't
spend half that in a year as an adult, I come back to the cost of being
"in" with peers. Too much. But the solution of uniforms has costs of
its own. Too high.
The underlying pressure must be redressed. Fixing the surface alone
means the problem will keep resurfacing.
-- Nick
Rick Merrill
The cost is an important issue, but the incessant competition of style,
fashion, and what's "in" is a huge distraction to many boys and girls.
Some say the-hell-with-it but many just jump in and compete. Ok, I'm in
the first group ;-)
lindsay
> pauline wrote:
> > I feel that the pressure on young girls to be attractive and 'well
> > groomed 'is very strong and fuelled from an early age by toy
> > manufactuers. It is hard for young girls to have an ideal body image
> > presented to them and i would like to see more emphasis on health fand
> > not looks and' grooming'.
> >
>
> It's not even the toy manufacturers who are guilty here. Sure, it's
> impossible to keep children from seeings toys like Barbie Dolls and
> Bratz and whatever else they make which influence girls to focus on
> being attractive to boys. But we must also place blame on parents,
> teachers and other role models. I would argue, in fact, that adults
> have much more influence over children in the long run than do
> advertisements and toy manufacturers. Adults who do not give girls the
> tools they need to focus on health and education instead of beuaty and
> boy-seeking do not give gils the tools to be whole, functioning adults
> in society. They do not even give girls the tools they need to be in
> control of their sexuality, because they socialize girls into a
> heteronormative society and pave the road for confusion non-hetero
> girls face when they become aware of their sexuality.
>
> in any case, I agree with you. It's a big problem.
>
> --
It is especially interesting to learn about the different ways the
media can have an impact on the way we think we (and others) should
look - such as how toy ads start targeting girls from such a young age
for only products related to appearance/grooming, unlike toys for boys
that are aimed at competition and skill. But toy manufacturers and ad
reps can't be solely blamed for this since they don't create the market
- parents and their kids do. There is obviously demand from girls for
these types of toys, so that is where parents come in.
>From the moment we are born, we are each specifically assigned to
either the blue hat or pink bow - boy or girl? Instantly. Our gender
determines more than I think we realize sometimes, even in parenting. I
really feel like girls are socialized from birth to worry about
appearance and be drawn towards those types of toys for that reason.
Parents can play a huge role in early life by being more careful to
stop helping kids confom to such strict gender roles - which the media
heavily reinforces every second. Obviously, I'm not an expert, but
gender-influenced parenting styles with the contstant influx of the
media can be a very dangerous thing for girls AND boys in many ways. I
think we, both as parents, future parents or just consumers, can change
things - but it will take a lot more awareness of any of these issues
to get anything done.
terri
influence and early socialisation techniques can only go so far.You
cannot argue with a 4 yr old having a screaming tantrum in the aisle of
toys'r'us,you either shut her up by buying her the little skanky doll
similar to her best friends or you take her home.You cannot buy her a
GI joe and say"play with this instead",she will probably bring that up
in therapy many many years later.
Michael Snyder
> Children want to play with the toys that other kids play with.Parental
> influence and early socialisation techniques can only go so far.You
> cannot argue with a 4 yr old having a screaming tantrum in the aisle of
> toys'r'us,you either shut her up by buying her the little skanky doll
> similar to her best friends or you take her home.
Well, if that's what you've always done, you may be stuck with it.
Unfortunately that's about the level of discipline that most
parents seem capable of these days -- which is why the rest of us
get to encounter screaming 4 year olds wherever we go.
This was not always the way things were in this culture,
nor is it the way things are in all other cultures.
Nick (Nick Levinson)
* * * * *
similar to her best friends or you take her home.
* * * * *
Considering what terri was responding to, you're proposing that
discipline requires the 4-year-old be given the G.I. Joe she doesn't
want? A G.I. Joe might be good for a grrl (a strong case can be made
for it) but not at the moment she'd only reject it. terri's suggestion
makes sense: if the child's request is beneficial or harmless
fulfilling the request is probably fine, and if you're refusing then
taking the child home instead of giving in to a temper tantrum sounds
disciplinary enough already. What's your alternative?
Among the skills children have to learn is a skill we adults already
know how to exercise and often use: negotiation. Forbidding everything
asked for can only be proposed by a nonparent; parents negotiate all
the time. Even the smallest children sometimes make good requests that
we grownups hadn't thought of and should grant.
I once convinced a small child I could hear her only when she
whispered, and not when she yelled. The only inconvenience, if it was
that, was that I had to respond whenever she whispered.
You wrote:
* * * * *
. . . the rest of us get to encounter screaming 4 year olds wherever we
go.
* * * * *
I live and walk around in New York City, population 8,000,000,
population of 4-year-olds approx. 80,000, population of 3-year-olds
another 80,000 or so, population of newborn-to-4-year-olds approx.
400,000. I don't encounter screaming children a tenth as often as you
suggest you do, wherever I go.
terri wrote:
* * * * *
Parental influence and early socialisation techniques can only go so
far.
* * * * *
Yes. Judith Rich Harris, in The Nurture Assumption, gathered evidence
from many studies that peers are much more influential on a child's
upbringing and parents much less so than we generally think.
-- Nick
Dan Holzman
terri <tagra...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Children want to play with the toys that other kids play with.Parental
>influence and early socialisation techniques can only go so far.You
>cannot argue with a 4 yr old having a screaming tantrum in the aisle of
>toys'r'us,you either shut her up by buying her the little skanky doll
>similar to her best friends or you take her home.You cannot buy her a
>GI joe and say"play with this instead",she will probably bring that up
>in therapy many many years later.
My parents found it suitable to say, "I'm not buying that for you, but
something else" when I wanted a toy they considered unsuitable. They
also found taking me home without buying me anything a suitable way of
teaching me that having a screaming tantrum was not the way to get
what I wanted.