References

"The Barbie and G.I. Joe Complex: The Projected Image of Gender?" Ignite The Mind. 11 Jan. 2009. 1 Apr. 2009 .

Glanton, Dahleen. "Barbie turns 50, but dolls forever young in eyes of U.S." Www.chicagotribune.com 29 Feb. 2009. Chicago Tribune. 1 Apr. 2009 .

Yelland, Nicola. Gender in Early Childhood. London: Routledge, 1998. Http://books.google.com/books?id=BYv1JsKjG54C&printsec=copyright&dq=gendering+in+the+media. Google Book Search. 1 Apr. 2009.

Revised Abstract

Sierra Schaller
March 23, 2009
WST 200
Abstract

Gender Reflected in the Mirror: Barbie, The American Icon?

Through exploring these media sources, particularly ads that are displayed through the accessible magazine and billboard, cultural norms in the everyday American society, it can be seen that if one ultimately chooses to accept the world that the media presents one with, then that world is a world of defined gender, which is used as a tool to convey power in the current culture. Historically, woman have struggled to become “equal” with men, different ethnicities and cultures have struggled to become “equal” with the average white man, yet these ads show that not too much has changed to what is appealing to the general audience, and what gender has the power. Yet ironically, it is the people that give the media power by feeding into such an influential source, and by giving the media power, we as a people of society give the media power to support the power that is masculinity, the weak that is feminine, with little cultural diversity and acceptance.
One aspect of this source of media that I want to explore further is the toy market in America, and how the production, selling, advertising, and the consuming of these products feeds into the dominance of masculinity and the weakness of femininity, and intersects with gender, power, race, and brings issues of what values this instills in the growing societies of tomorrow.
According to the blogg “Ignite the Mind”, the type of dolls that are sold at stores such as Walmart, K-Mart, Toys ‘R Us, etc. sends messages of “a little girl plays with a doll, she enjoys making her look beautiful, perhaps even playing dress-up, standing in a mirror, and pretending to be a princess. The obviousness is that young girls are seeing that Barbie is the way a female should be; perfect physically, emotionally, socially, and otherwise. As for action figures, young boys are seeing they need to be aggressive to have control over their environment, that power is something to be used for one’s personal “mission,” and that a tough, non-emotional exterior is a true sign of maleness” (Ignitethemind.today.com). This statement is for the most part very true in current society today, especially with how the companies package and advertise the dolls. Barbie is in a perfectly fitted cardboard box, depicting her as the ideal, independent woman, complete with pink everything, blonde hair, and white skin. This can also lead to the question why is Barbie packaged and advertised in the way she is? Cross-culturally speaking, what other values does Barbie portray? Why only one obvious race portrayed? More importantly, where are these dolls manufactured and shipped? Surely not on American soil, yet these toys are ironically setting up the future generation of tomorrow for what is acceptably “gendered” and what aspects are acceptable for these gendered stereotypes, and how much power the media has in essentially defining these rolls.
When it comes to what different cultural values and ethnicities Barbie portrays as the ultimate ‘All-American’ girl symbol, “ ‘Barbie represents a tragic thread in American culture—that assimilation is important if you want to be accepted as American.’ said Mary Rogers, a sociologist at the University of West Florida and author of ‘Barbie Culture.’ ‘That [Mattel] can manipulate racial and class imagery is what makes Barbie such a powerful commentator on who we are and the cultural contradictions we have.’ Mattel officials said Barbie reflects the existing culture. They pointed out that the company introduced the first black Barbie in 1965, and have since produced 50 different nationalities with 26 different skin tones” (Glanton). This shows how far, yet how ignorant the melting pot of America has come to be. The fact that society and the media had to make it a point to create a doll of a different ethnicity other then Caucasian, rather then it being second nature, shows a great deal of what American culture sees and views as acceptable.
Another interesting point that is made in the book Gender and Early Childhood, by Nicole Yelland, states that “Childhood itself has come to be seen as a gendered social phenomenon. Qvortrup (1994) argues that contemporary childhood is the life-space that our culture limits it to be, in its definitions throughout the courts, the school, the family and the economy” This is another supporting statement of how incredibly influential children of today have become, and how far we have come in history from using children as industrial laborers in the 1700’s, to valued as future leaders of society, yet the way society and the media use tools such as dolls and “gendering” demonstrate and influence how these children “should act” in society.
This final project has moved from a space concerning the power of media through magazine and build board ads, to the physical mechanisms of dolls and toys, and how these dolls, Barbie in particular, enters a more specific space of crossing what is gender, how we gender as a culture, cross-culturally representing where America stands, and also where and how these dolls are produced in masses, and make millions for CEO’s of the companies that work for such toy companies. I plan to further my study in the production of Barbie, different companies, the history and roll of children in American society, and how much influence the idea and concept of Barbie has had on what America sees and views as “the norm”, and “the accepted”.

Mid Term Project. The World Media Creates: Are You Apart of It?

Part I:

http://www.kissmestace.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/dng-rauncy-ad.jpg

Despite my previous knowledge of this image, I believe it deserves recognition as a true and tangible reality of how gender and power are interpreted and accepted in society. This ad sparked major controversy when released in Europe, and was pulled before released in the U.S. It suggested a form of not taking action when sexual assault was taking place. The background of men, built, toned, and white, the accepted norm for an appealing males in the general fashion world, observing a woman that has a “blank stare” in her eyes, as a man, with no shirt, wearing sunglasses, holds her down by her wrists. The intersection of gender and power come into play by having the men, strong, standing, all above, staring at the weak woman, who has no intent in her eyes at all. A “gendered” female is seen as frail, thin, expressionless, weak, and feeble in the world of fashion, and “gendered” men have the obvious power and control by being seen as physically strong- which can therefore be translated as mentally strong. Therefore, if one lives in the world of fashion, believes in the world of fashion, that is what is accepted and “fed” into- a male as the powerful one of the two sexes, female gender as weak and an object. Violence also plays an obvious role in this demonstration and intersection of gender and power.



http://quelquesfilles.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/calvin_klein_ad.jpg

This next Calvin Kline ad was released in the mid-90’s, and even though this is another ad focusing on what is trendy in pop-culture, this particular fashion ad speaks to so much of what America sees as appealing, or rather what media wants to be globally is appealing. What does this ad say about what is masculine? What is feminine? How does it strip the idea of what is powerful- what makes a man masculine, a woman feminine, and visa versa? The stance of the woman is suggestive of that of a man using a urinal, but the fact that it is a woman suggests that she is as “powerful” as a man. Therefore, in actuality, the power is still given to that of a man, and therefore choosing the reality of the media, the gender of male still has more power over that of the female gender.


http://blog.lib.umn.edu/raim0007/gwss1001/untitled.bmp

The particular ad for alcohol is one that speaks to more of the cultural norm for an acceptably attractive and feminine female. To the left is a picture of a “dopy” eyed girl, with the color in a faded black and white- suggesting a negative connotation, and to the right, the older version of the same girl, now in a much more colorful picture, and the girl is much more developed, appealing to a male audience. The “catch-phrase” that this ad uses is the most powerful and degrading to woman: “the longer you wait…the better it gets”. What is the target-market of this ad? It can be interpreted that a male audience would be the target market in that the woman is being used to demonstrate the saying “the longer you wait…the better it gets”, suggesting that the gender of male has the power, because the ad is through men’s eyes, and it is also portraying woman that do not expose their body to the public, woman that are not blonde, are not “better” woman, so therefore men have the power and control again over this image that the media preaches to the public.

http://contexts.org/socimages/files/2008/06/shredded-wheat1.jpg

This last ad for cereal can be seen as something of not too much complexity, yet it supports greatly the idea of how much power the gender of male still has in the media- and how gender represents power in the media. The woman, laying in a “seductive” pose in the kitchen, wearing red, yet has a man’s button down shirt over her outfit. In the background, the man is in the corner, looking concerned, with only wearing an undershirt and jeans, therefore suggesting that the woman is now wearing his shirt. The question as well, emphasis the idea of how this woman is exerting power by being that “hungry woman”. But is this really giving a sense of power to the gender of female- or “stripping” that man of his masculinity and in a sense giving it to the woman, and therefore re-iterating that in the media culture masculinity equals power, in and out of the kitchen. The woman’s suggestive pose on the countertop also conveys her as having the power, even though the man is standing in the corner, she is still physically higher then him. Yet, by her wearing a man’s shirt and being a “hungry woman” make the gendered female more powerful?


Part II:

Through exploring these media sources, particularly ads that are displayed through the accessible magazine and billboard, cultural norms in the everyday American society, it can be seen that if one ultimately chooses to accept the world that the media presents one with, then that world is a world of defined gender, which is used as a tool to convey power in the current culture. Historically, woman have struggled to become “equal” with men, different ethnicities and cultures have struggled to become “equal” with the average white man, yet these ads show that not too much has changed to what is appealing to the general audience, and what gender has the power. Yet ironically, it is the people that give the media power by feeding into such an influential source, and by giving the media power, we as a people of society give the media power to support the power that is masculinity, the weak that is feminine, with little cultural diversity and acceptance.

Gender and Power images: reality? fantasy? Both? (click on the image to see full picture)

Faciltation: “Chapter 15: Militarism; Structural and Interpersonal Violence,” Humanity Books: Prometheus Books, 2004, 343-367.

Key Words: militarism, structural violence, interpersonal violence, domestic violence, homophobic violence, unemployment, civilian, minority groups, weapons, defense spending, security, business community, social spending, economically privileged, federal government, local government, war, homelessness, U.S military, Department of Homeland Security, sexual assaults, hierarchy, paramilitary activists, egalitarian, Counterintelligence Program, Department of Justice, intimidation, deportation, political manipulation

Key Phrases: monies expended on the military, nonprofit public sector, after-school programs, withholding food and shelter from those who can not afford it, fighting terrorism, anti-Communist fundamentalists forces, Department of Homeland Security, force is the way to achieve goals, probable homophobic, assertively heterosexual, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, sexual misconduct, severe aggression, atmosphere of intimidation

Key Names: Dwight D. Eisenhower, Martin Luther King Jr., The Taliban, John J. Pavlick, Bill Clinton, Barry Winchell, Jeff Cooper, Jose E. Serrano, Katie Sierra

Key Ideas: There were many ideas of anti-militarism in Chasin’s article, and she made it clear on her stand point of what the military and the militarism culture has done to American society. Militarism has contributed to a lack in funding in health care, funding for schools, funding for after-school programs, and has heavily taken away from what is called social spending. Militarism has also contributed to an increase in homophobic tendencies, and domestic violence. These acts are fueled by the violent culture that is instilled in the training to become apart of the millenarian culture. A “real man” is one that is powerful through violence, internal and external, and one that has dominance over the weaker species that is women. This leads to the military in the U.S contributing to rape and sexual assaults against women, whether that is in the home, or with fellow peers in one’s academy. Yet, most of these assaults, even when it comes to rape, go unreported, out of a fear of social rejection from such a tight-knit society that is so honored and praised within American culture. The military, and massive funding for it, comes from the ideas of being a true “patriot” for the land of the free and the brave, which is what our society is so proudly unique and built upon, yet the violent culture that militarism creates ironically silences many. This silencing includes those that are of homosexual orientation in the military, which has lead to not just sever beatings and harassment, but death as well. So Chasin asks her audience the ultimate question, is the military truly contributing to protecting our country and benefiting our freedom as a whole?

This article contributes in a variety of ways to gender studies in many ways, and one that I personally found most interesting was how much the article centered on the formation of what masculinity truly is in American society, and how ironically small that description has become. Chasin mentions how sergeants in the military, when training future soldiers to become “real men”, they call them “sissy’s, pussys, and girls”. As an insulting maneuver, many drill sergeants call the men that are in training “ladies”. Why is this? What is so degrading and weak about women? Why is it so insulting? The majority of this article argues how the military has crippled society financially and morally, and has increased a censored culture that praises the “war on terror” over truly protecting our culture and increasing our freedom as a nation.

When it comes to internal violence…
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half-billion bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than eight thousand people…Is there no other way the world can live?” (Eisenhower 345).

What are other ways to defend our homeland against attacks? Do you think we would have less need for violent weapons if we as a nation spent more money on feeding and sheltering those in need? Why is war so recognized and honored in American culture? What does that say about what we value? What do we value in men and women as separate genders in the millenarian culture?


“After-school programs for about five hundred thousand students will end; the cost of these was $400 million. This amount is about the cost of two F/A fighter jets. The Air Force is requesting twenty-two of these at a total cost of 5.2 billion. The United States already has the strongest air force in the world, with five thousand planes and at least eight thousand helicopters. How many are needed to protect us from countries with far less air power? Since the peak hours for youth crime and drug use in between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. the cuts to after-school programs mean there will probably be more juvenile crime” (347).

What does this say about what American culture values? Does the instilment of violence contribute to the crime that happens after school, or is it the fact that children have no funding for a constructive outlet?

WST 200 PRESENTATION FOR WEDS

Appoint 1 plus observer

Challenges in defining gender and power:

Our group had an incredibly hard time trying to think “outside the box” and not going on a linear pathway, when it came to defining actual gender and power, and how each related to each other. What we did realize was that the societies and cultures we as individuals grew up in heavily influenced what we thought gender was, and actually if gender was an adjective or a verb in society. Our ideas on the difference between sex and gender, and how society influences what one’s sex means we realized is heavily bias, only because it depends on what culture, government, society, etc. one has been raised within. The connection between gender and power was another challenging definition. Our group struggled with the concept of power in general, and what that meant in society, how people in general saw power, and what made power. That was the big question that seemed to lead the conversation. The other difficulty was trying to connect gender and power without thinking in a “linear” way. Achieving a global perspective with all of our experiences as individuals was challenging in that so many of us have had the same experiences and grown up in similar social settings.

Resistance among members of group:

There was not much tension at all during our group discussion. Yet, we did have some varying opinions and inputs from each individual. The best way to sum up the aspects of different views on gender and power in the group would be that each person would bring up a new point about what gender is, and much of the group would support that belief. When it came to what power was we had some different views. Some believed it had to do more with judgment as whole, and what the concept of judgment does to society. Others saw power relating more to feminism and masculinity, and masculinity being the concept with the most power. Some of the group members also were disagreeing on how in depth the analysis should be when it came to examining gender and power.

Agreement in making the group:

When it came to power, the idea of feminism and masculinity was brought up, and how in American culture, masculinity has the most power. As a group we realized that we needed to question this more, and saw that as society we give masculinity the power, but then that led again to the question of what is power? And what role does that play in society, and how does it connect to gender? We agreed that gender is not something, but rather a verb. We came to the conclusion that people in society are “gendered”, according to the rules that society sets for each sex, biologically speaking. These rules come from the power in society, and then the group seemed to lean towards the question of “what creates this power in society?” It was suggested and agreed on by most that judgment by others is silently creating power, because those that do not follow the rules of society are seen as outsiders, and this led to a connection we all enthusiastically agreed upon: when it comes to being “gendered”, one can either follow the rules or rebel in expressing themselves. Then who has the power to judge? The idea of those that are charismatic leaders in society, and those that are not scared to have their voice be heard will ultimately set the rules that society will sub-consciously follow.