He gets hero worship, she gets laundry

Today on feministing, Jessica Valenti blogs that PlaySkool is still pushing their Rose Petal Cottage on American girls.

The pink, pastel wonder comes complete with a washer/dryer, oven, baby cradle and stuffed chair. Now there's nothing wrong with children wanting to play house or play with domestic toys. I had a tea set when I was little and I adored princess clothes and baby dolls. But sometimes my "baby" and I would be mother and daughter taking a safari through the backyard. Sometimes I'd be wearing a tiara while climbing trees and splashing in mud puddles.

I don't understand why we haven't advanced beyond this notion that kids today play a certain way based on what's between their legs.

The Rose Petal Cottage is a classic example -- it's just one female stereotype after another. A line from the sing-songie advertisement goes, "I love when my clothes get so clean, taking care of my home is a dream dream dream."

Now Playskool has put out the Sweet Lily Castle -- for $200 your daughter can be a princess complete with frog to kiss (cause every princess needs a prince). Just once I want the princess outfit to come with a throne and palm pilot to plan all your diplomatic meetings and charity events!



Again, I see nothing wrong with selling stuff like this. But when you step back (like way back) to look at the big picture. It starts to get frustrating.

Last night, I was watching TV and a ridiculous commercial came on. Sexy boyfriend and I were laughing hysterically at it, but I immediately noticed the language



It's not just that only boys are featured in the video, from the voice over, it's clear this is a boys-only toy.

"He’s steering the action"
"Everything your little hero needs" -- hero apparently meaning MALE
"His imagination is racing"

Keep in mind this is also a PlaySkool toy, the same folks that make Rose Petal Cottage and Sweet Lily Castle.

When toys mature, it's the same problem. Take a look at this image (I lifted it from Feministing who got it from Elle phd




Via Elle:

And while the "boy's" kit promises to boost your brain... the "girl's" kit promise to relax you and let you experiment with different fragrances. The boy's box is also covered with words like "go wild" and "erupt" and "blow your mind,"while the only thing that promises to be exciting about the girl's is the foaming and frothing of bubbles.

When you stop at feministing, check out even MORE examples of sexist packaging for young girls/boys products. And it starts at Playskool and just continues... actually, it probably starts the minute the doctor says, "It's a girl."

As soon as the "Helmet Heroes" commercial was done (and we were finished giggling at the dad "behind bars") I said to Sexy Boyfriend, "Why can't HER imagination be racing?"

He sort of snorted at me, "You WOULD notice that."

Yeah I would. And I'm kinda pissed that he doesn't. I get really sick of people brushing it off as 'no big deal' when we just went through an election that had some of the worst open displays of sexism and misogyny our country has seen in YEARS. Don't tell me that all these antiquated ideas about sex and gender and the so-called limitations thereof (what girls can't do etc) doesn't have REAL ramifications.

Luckily, I saw this video on CNN today about two high school girls who play football on their school team. Yes, they wear heels and like to shop but they are assets to the team and even wish they could tackle. That representation is much more truthful. Girls can still be girls (whatever that means) even while playing football in the mud, experimenting with chemistry and running for President!

Racism + Ick = BK commercial

This may be old and no longer airing (I saw it on a recorded TV show on our DVR) but regardless, I'm shocked that this was EVER considered a good idea.



And it makes me sad because I like going to Burger King -- their apple fries and $1 side salad is a perfect snack.

I know Burger King has a history of stupid ads but this one is seriously making me reconsider if I should put any money in their pocket. Plus, it's not an appetite boost to see a man unhinge his jaw and swallow a triple woppher.

F***ing Brilliant

In my last post, I wrote about this billboard. The discussion has sparked an interesting debate with remarks such as "women bring this on themselves."

Well a comment from Adrienne was so well written that I have decided to give it a proper place as its own post. To read comments leading up to this answer, click here.

Adrienne states:

Although I hate giving this answer, it is absolutely true: if you were a woman, you would totally get the whole 'objectification of women' problem. Imagine your wife having to go out in a skimpy tank top and boy shorts with an impending wedgie in order to get a fair deal at a car dealership. If the thought makes you uncomfortable, imagine how we feel-- especially if you do not, for whatever reason, fulfill that sexual stereotype. Is it fair for me to walk into a store and not get service, while my five foot one hundred and ten pound sister gets helped immediately? Call it human nature, and I'll buy it, but that doesn't make it right. My money is as good as anyone's, so is my time, and-- attention please-- so is my body. Same parts, same functions. In fact, I may even use some of my parts better than others.

Admittedly, the problem is, at times, stemming from women. I've commented on this before on this site. But lets examine that, shall we? In my experience-- as a woman-- women who pull me down because of my appearance do so because of some insecurity of their own. Why? Because we all see each other as competition. The fact that the sexual stereotypes (thou must be skinny, full breasted, with long blonde hair and ruby red lips) perpetuate in our heads is not our fault (even if it is our problem).

Looking at things from a generational stand point, let us take a small look at the women who we gained most of our insight from: Our Mothers. Our mothers, who were raised watching TV shows where girls were told that being a woman was better because it meant less responsibility and decision making. Mothers who took high school courses on making perfect roasts and how to fold napkins, while the boys learned accounting and managerial skills.

And, above all else, mothers who were taught by THEIR mothers that they needed to be a certain sexual stereotype in order to snag a bread winner for their empty little heads. It's no secret that since the beginning of time men have been choosing women based solely on their looks: if she's a virgin and she's beautiful, then she's worth every penny of the bride price. If she's 'soiled,' or ugly, then she better come with an awesome dowry. You may think times have changed, but the women of my generation-- when both eating disorders and teenage sexuality are at an all time high-- know differently.

Again, the fact that the stereotype perpetuates is not our fault, even if it is our problem.

The stereotype stems from, was created by, men. I have actually been broken up with because I am overweight. I have lost roles in musicals because I do not fulfill the 'romantic lead' appearance. I have been overlooked for PR positions because I don't have a 'public face' (look at the number one college major for beauty queens: communications).

The problem with this billboard is that it is selling sex. What a tired, overdone marketing ploy. This billboard tells me nothing about the radio station except that it is run by men, for men, who are willing to exploit and objectify women in order to get more listeners (read: money). What kind of music do they play? Soft core porn?

The question is: where do we draw the line? At what point have we crossed it? What negative outcomes could possibly outweigh the gains of this billboard?

Will all the teenage girls with eating disorders, trying desperately to look like this bill board please raise their hands? Continue raising them if you have also purchased ridiculously promiscuous clothes in an attempt to attract attention to your pubescent body?

And, PS-- it doesn't make much sense to have sex so blatantly on display for all to see and then to make contraceptives and abortion illegal. Just saying.



****

WELL DONE SISTER. Truly couldn't have said it better myself

Don't give DOVE props just yet

I love these ads. Mainstream advertising has been screaming for something bold and true like this. Not that there's anything wrong with skinny models but it isn't right that the majority of women represented in ads are young, white, blonde, and fat free. Women come in all ages, colors and body types. It's so great to see women's products marketing to this truth. They are playing a crucial role in ending the hypocrisy where there is only one acceptable and "beautiful" type of woman.

The campaign for real beauty is also a great movement.

However, I just learned that Dove is a subsidiary of Unilever. Axe is also a subsidiary of Unilever.

Axe spray for men is also affiliated with the Order of Serpentine another Axe product that advertises to men with the phrase "Clean body. Clean conscience." They say "Use this product to scrub away memories of questionable hookups"-- you know, with ugly chicks.

Har har.

Now, I try to have a sense of humor. I get that they're marketing to men and sometimes they are humorous. Lines like "A wall of beer cans, wow you're so awesome" are so wildly unlikely, it is funny. I mean, what guy doesn't dream of women who are turned on by video games, beer and baseball. But there comes a point ...

I am sick of seeing these commercials where the man sprays Axe all over himself (and way too much, I might add) and suddenly women, all slender, with huge boobs (often in schoolgirl outfits) are attacking this man and ripping his clothes off. This isn't funny. It's lame and rather insulting.

How can we buy this message "See women as real people, real individuals who come in many shapes and sizes. Respect them and love them because they are beautiful" when at the same time we have products marketed to men advocating how to be a "Player non regretis."

There has to be smarter ways to market to men while not objectifying women.