Last visit was: It is currently Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:13 am


All times are UTC - 4 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - always a lively discussion on WBB
PostPosted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 2:26 pm 
orange scribe

Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:38 pm
Posts: 5278
I also imagine - I can look for stats later - that having a parent with these views, poor body inage, disordered eating, etc is more likely to influence you and jack you up than a plastic doll is

//cellphonetypo

_________________
forgiveness has never been about changing the past, it's always been about changing the future

I myself am made entirely of flaws, stitched together with good intentions.

http://recoverysabotage.tumblr.com/


Last edited by FadingHippie on Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - always a lively discussion on WBB
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 2:54 am 
admin goddess from hell
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 12363
Quote:
Why the heck are we spending so much time talking about a piece of plastic?

It's a piece of molded plastic. If we follow this same train of thought it'll lead us to a lot of frustration without a lot of end benefit.


Well, arguably, "we" don't need to be spending so much time talking about a piece of plastic. If it is a waste of time for other people, they may be better advised to hit the "Mark as Read" button and go on to talk about something more relevant to them. That is the strength of WBB - that we all have different interests and ideas and interpretations; we would be a pretty dull site if we all had the same interests and agreed on everything. And nor do we need to agree: you and I have disagreed on many things in the past, and yet still managed to develop trust, friendship and respect.

This is a subject of interest to me, perhaps because I have watched my own children grow up, maybe not with specific memories from early childhood, but with lasting general concepts that affected their psychological, emotional and intellectual development. Books are a great example of how we, as parents, influenced their ideological perspectives on the world. And, let us not underestimate the power of a "piece of plastic": certain pieces of plastic are used to build explosive devices.

Quote:
And I really just think this so so ridiculous and is becoming moreso. Like some weird fixation or goal to prove Barbie's evil.


It seems reasonable to me that the totality of a child's surroundings, including parental behaviours as well as choices of playthings, must have some role to play in the way s/he develops emotionally and psychologically. It seems reasonable that if children are surrounded by images of body-shopped and gender-steroptyped men and women, reinforced by the toys available to them, and perhaps combined with parental behaviours, they may be more vulnerable to firing the trigger that initiates an eating disorder. This is not about Barbie; Barbie just happens to be the most obvious symbol. I would certainly be interested if anyone would post some research or articles on the lack of any apposite effects of children's playthings on their development.

But more than that, as I said, it is not about Barbie as anything other than a symbol: yes, we all know her shape is unrealistic. But is it really just happenstance that the changes in children's toys combined with the bombardment on children of "ideal" body imagery over the past two decades (the time period during which I have been watching, as a parent) coincides with the increasing development of eating disorders amongst younger and younger boys and girls?

More and more on the topic of children and toys is coming across my feeds these days, and I am just trying to put together some of the pieces. If anyone finds it ridiculous, you may just want to mark this as read right about now, as I have a couple more articles I am going to quote after this one. If your concern is that this thread is somehow bringing WeBiteBack into disrepute or tarnishing our image, then we should talk about that. Otherwise, it is an interest I plan to continue pursuing.

_________________
Whispered words of wisdom,
Let it be.

~~ John Lennon


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - always a lively discussion on WBB
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 2:59 am 
admin goddess from hell
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 12363
Quote:
By Josh Stearns

Attachment:
Lego.jpg
Lego.jpg [ 81.75 KiB | Viewed 39519 times ]


Dear LEGO - Take the Street Harassment Out of Your Stickers

My son is just getting into Legos, so I thought he’d love these stickers. Then I took a closer look and saw that one of the construction workers (the only one wearing “cool” sunglasses) was labeled “Hey Babe!”

I was stunned. Maybe it’s the fact that I just saw the team at Hollaback speak this month, or maybe it is that this is Sexual Assault Awareness Month, or maybe it is just that street harassment sucks. But chances are it was all three of these things that made me so mad to see a brand I love pushing this sort of thing.

The Hollaback website notes that street harassment is the most prevalent form of sexual violence for both men and women in the United States. Internationally, they point out, “studies show that between 70-99% of women experience street harassment at some point during their lives.”

Lego hasn’t really been on a roll recently when it comes to gender and its toys. See for example this post over at Ms. Magazine that picks apart the images of beauty in Lego’s new line of toys for girls (and check out the great ad from 1981 to see how far they have fallen).

Needless to say, I didn’t buy the stickers.

Talking to Strangers

_________________
Whispered words of wisdom,
Let it be.

~~ John Lennon


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - always a lively discussion on WBB
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 3:06 am 
admin goddess from hell
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 12363
Quote:
Beauty and the New LEGO Line for Girls
By Lisa Wade
January 10, 2012

A few years back we published this fantastic ad for LEGOs as an example of gender-neutral advertising. It appeared in 1981; during my childhood, I’m happy to say.

Attachment:
Lego 1.jpg
Lego 1.jpg [ 162.77 KiB | Viewed 39519 times ]


The ad offers nice context for the new effort by LEGO to capture The Girl Market. Their new line of LEGOs, LEGO Friends, has gotten a lot of attention already. In the circles I run in, it’s being roundly criticized for reproducing stereotypes of girls and women: domesticity, vanity, materialism, and an obsession with everything being pastel. Kits include a house, cafe, animal hospital, tree house, beauty salon, and an inventor’s lab. Choice examples:

Attachment:
Lego 2.jpg
Lego 2.jpg [ 24.25 KiB | Viewed 39519 times ]


Attachment:
Lego 3.jpg
Lego 3.jpg [ 37.87 KiB | Viewed 39519 times ]


Attachment:
Lego 4.jpg
Lego 4.jpg [ 24.16 KiB | Viewed 39519 times ]


The new line also includes a new LEGO figurine that is taller, thinner and more feminine—with boobs. There is no innovation here; it is the exact same makeover that we’ve seen in recent years with Dora the Explorer, Strawberry Shortcake and Holly Hobbie, Lisa Frank, Trolls and Cabbage Patch Kids, My Little Pony, Rainbow Brite, and Candy Land (or visit Sociological Images’ Pinterest collection of Sexy Toy Make-Overs).

The company is framing their new line for girls with “science.” Executives are going to great lengths to explain that the line is based on research, using anthropologists who spent time with girls in their homes. The frame gives the company an excuse for reproducing the same old gender stereotypes that we see throughout our culture. They can shrug their shoulders and say, “Well, what are we to do? This is what girls want.” In this way they are trying to make it clear that they shouldn’t be held accountable for the messages their products send.

But it’s no accident that girls feel alienated from LEGO.

According to Business Week, LEGO has spent most of the last decade focusing their products on boys. They have deliberately designed products that they expect will appeal to boys and included boys almost exclusively in their marketing material. Today LEGOs are shelved in the boy aisle is most toy stores.

So, basically, what LEGO has done over the last few decades is take a truly wonderful gender-neutral toy, infuse it with boyness, and tell every kid who’ll listen that the toy is not-for-girls. Now, stuck with only 50 percent of the kid market, they’re going after girls by overcompensating. And, to top it all off, they’re shaking their heads and doing “science” to try to figure out girls, as if they’re some strange variant of human that regular humans just can’t get their head around.

In fact, girls don’t feel like the toy is for them because LEGO has done everything in its power to ensure that they will not.

The market research manager sums up Legos’ impression of what girls want this way: “The greatest concern for girls really was beauty.” How ironic, because the true beauty of LEGO is its ability to inspire creativity, not enable conformity. They somehow knew that back in 1981.

Ms. Blog

_________________
Whispered words of wisdom,
Let it be.

~~ John Lennon


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 3:59 am 
i bite back hardcore

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:40 am
Posts: 412
Location: Ireland
I have to agree with Sally on this, I have been busy sharing all the articles she posted. I have A LOT of friends, none of whom has an ED ( that I'm aware of) who are interested in these issues. Most are mothers to little girls, some have only boys, others don't have kids yet but plan to. And their husbands are concerned too. So thank you Sally for starting this thread. I've read some of them before but it's good to have them all gathered up in one spot.

_________________
... participating in such an odyssey involves a willingness to travel like Dante or Persephone into and through the dark unknown, and only then to emerge into a previously unsuspected fullness.

Saki Santorelli


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 4:08 am 
admin goddess from hell
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 12363
I don't know why, but it seems to be the topic du jour on so many of the sites and feeds I use. Here is another one, a petition started by two young women in college:

Quote:
Petition Background (Preamble):

We are two female college undergraduates who are extremely concerned by the growing “overtly-sexualized” imagery presented to young girls, especially as embodied through Bratz dolls.

Bratz dolls embody a hyper-sexualized portrayal of young girls—big eyes, scantily clad, plumped limps, heavy makeup, long flowing hair, eyelash extensions.

The hyper-sexual Bratz dolls are problematic because:

1. Sexualization has been linked with the three most common mental health problems for girls and women: eating disorders, low self-esteem, and depression.

2. With the development new digital platforms, mass mediated images are being distributed on a much wider scale than ever before and the constant exposure to such images negatively affects the way in which young girls view themselves and the role they should occupy in society.

3. Such sexualized portrayals of girls has wider societal effects in the way that others, such as the adult shoppers, view girls –leading to increased sexual harassment and sexual violence as well as demands of child pornography (Report of the APA task force on the sexualization of girls, 2006).

We need strong girls who will grow into strong women – beaming with self-confidence, wit, intelligence, a sense of adventure, but most importantly a sense of self. Therefore, we should be demanding toys that promote such growth.

Quote:
Petition:
Join us and sign our petition to boycott Bratz dolls. We need to send a message that we will not stand for or commercially support such sexualized toys. There are better toy options—fostering a healthier self-image, creativity, confidence, and fun.


GoPetition - Changing the World (This is also where you can sign the petition, if you are so inclined.)

_________________
Whispered words of wisdom,
Let it be.

~~ John Lennon


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 1:51 am 
admin goddess from hell
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 12363
So, something is happening to our children, for children as young as four to be manifesting fat stigmatisation. In this research, attributed to, "youngsters...picking up on a prejudice towards obesity that is all around them, from the opinions of their parents to TV shows which ‘ridicule’ the fat":

Quote:
How we start being 'fattist' at four: Study finds children would not think of overweight person as a potential friend
By Fiona Macrae
May 14, 2013

They struggle to read or even tie their shoelaces. But four-year-old children have already learnt to dislike fat people.

A study of 126 boys and girls who had just started school showed they were loath to think of an overweight story book character as a potential friend.

However, they had no qualms about ‘befriending’ the same character when he was of normal weight or disabled.

The Leeds University researchers said it seems that even very young children have picked up on the prejudice against fat people that pervades society.

Professor Andrew Hill read boys and girls who aged between four and six one of three versions of a specially-commissioned children’s book.

The story described a group of children and what happened when Toby, their ‘really naughty’ cat, got stuck in a tree.

In each case, the storyline was the same. However, the pictures varied, with Alfie, the main character, depicted as being of normal weight, overweight or disabled.

The schoolchildren, who were in reception class and year one, were then asked to rate Alfie’s attributes.

Fat Alfie was less likely to win a race, do well at school, be happy with his looks and get invited to parties than normal-weight Alfie.

The Alfie who was in a wheelchair was also marked down but not to the same extent.

Most tellingly, hardly any of the children said they’d want fat Alfie as a friend.

Only one of the 43 children read the fat Alfie version of the book chose him as a potential pal.

A female version of the story produced a similar result, with just two of 30 children saying they’d want to play with fat Alfina.

The results of the study, the first to show that children of such a young age stigmatise those who are fat, were presented at European Congress on Obesity in Liverpool.

Professor Hill said: ‘This research confirms young children’s awareness of the huge societal interest in body size.

‘It shows that by school entry age, UK children have taken on board the negativity associated with fatness and report its penalties in terms of appearance, school activities and socially.

‘This negativity was shared by another visibly different characterisation, a child in a wheelchair, but to a far smaller extent.

‘Children rejected the fat character regardless of whether the character was male or female.

‘Children’s own gender made no difference to their choices.

‘But there was some evidence that older children expressed more negative views.’

He said that with parents of obese children saying their youngsters are already socially isolated at the age of five, such views could underpin weight-related bullying and victimisation.

The professor said that he believes the youngsters are picking up on a prejudice towards obesity that is all around them, from the opinions of their parents to TV shows which ‘ridicule’ the fat.

He added: ‘I think we have an underlying social commentary about weight and morals and that the morality of people is based on their shape.

‘I think that is very powerful and kids are sensitive to it.’

Professor John Wilding, of the UK Association for the study of Obesity, said: ‘I think it matters because we know that the social stigma associated with weight problems is quite significant.

‘It is reflected in reduced employment opportunities and all sorts of other aspects of life.

‘If these stereotypes are starting in childhood, it is going to be very hard to reverse them.

‘I guess we need to think about how to change that in society.’

Daily Mail

_________________
Whispered words of wisdom,
Let it be.

~~ John Lennon


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 2:26 am 
admin goddess from hell
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 12363
For $29.00 admission, you, too, can dream:

Quote:
Occupy Barbie's Dreamhouse! And Quit Telling Girls to Dream
By Katy Waldman
May 22, 2013

Attachment:
Barbie Dreamhouse.jpg
Barbie Dreamhouse.jpg [ 20.71 KiB | Viewed 39459 times ]


Where do you even start with Barbie? Few toys inspire such feminist gnashing of teeth as the 11 ½-inch plastic doll, with her blindingly white skin, impossible figure, and fathomless wardrobe. And now her Dreamhouse tourist attraction has descended, like the hut from the Baba Yaga story, on Berlin, where it’s been greeted by topless protestors waving burning crosses and men ironically dressed in pink skirts and blond wigs. “Occupy Barbie’s Dreamhouse,” they cry, condemning the doll for promoting consumerism, narcissism and unhealthy body ideals. Their placards—and torsos—are scrawled with slogans like “Pink stinks!” “I will free you from the horror house,” and “Life in plastic is not fantastic.”

It’s easy to sympathize with the 99 percent here: The Barbie Dreamhouse Experience, which opened its doors last Thursday in the middle of grey Alexanderplatz, is a 26,900-square foot shrine to all things pink, shimmery and superficial. Inside, kids can “bake” virtual cupcakes on touch screens (Is it worse that it’s virtual baking or that it’s cupcakes?), lust after Barbie’s shoe collection, loll around in stiletto-shaped chairs, work a catwalk, or lip-sync pop tunes on a karaoke stage. Why, you might ask, can young visitors only choose careers such as “pop star” and “supermodel?” “Pretending to be an engineer is a hard concept for a four or six-year-old to play out,” Mattel’s Stephanie Cota told the Wall Street Journal. Meanwhile, demonstrators called the exhibition a “seemingly endless walk-in closet.”

In defense of this feminist’s nightmare, the house’s advocates have marshaled the language of fantasy and play. “I feel sorry about how some people interpret our giant pink playground,” said Christoph Rahofer, of EMS Entertainment, which co-created the dreamhouse experience. Even Michael Koschitzki, a member of the demonstrating youth group affiliated to Germany’s far-left party, die Linke, felt the need to hedge, “Our protest is not directed towards little girls and their dreams.”

Perish the thought. I won’t waste your time running through all the reasons why the Barbie dream in particular is so perverse—the layers of racism, materialism, vanity, body insecurity, and passivity billowing around it like so much gauze—but I would like to challenge the idea that anyone today can get away with anything simply by invoking that hallowed word: dream. We cannot reject Barbie’s ridiculous mansion, we infer, because doing so would trample on little girls’ dreams. It would poison their play. The defense of the Dreamhouse is built into its name, as if any attempt to speak out against it would necessarily crush the tender shoots of youthful imagination under a big slab of adult agenda.

Look, I get the gossamer loveliness of dreams, the bigness of them. I swoon for Keats and Gatsby and am getting weepy just thinking about the gorgeous rebuttals that will probably appear in this post’s comment section: In Praise of Dreaming, Dreams Make Us Human, etc. But despite what they tell you, a dream is not the same as a plan or a vision or an aspiration. It is the ultimate in passivity, something visited upon you while you are asleep. Or it’s what a princess does as she gazes out the window and waits for her happy ending. Do we need to telegraph to girls that the be-all and end-all of their young lives is spinning out beautiful mental pictures that have no basis in reality? Because, ultimately, that’s where the dreaming defense gets its juice: It’s a way of assuring critics, “this isn’t real, it’s nothing to worry about, it’s just a game.” (“Baking a digital cupcake on a touch screen in the Dreamhouse kitchen won’t confine you to stand by an oven for the rest of your life,” insists Rahofer.) But if Barbie’s proportions, celebrity and overall way of being aren’t attainable, then why dangle them in front of girls’ faces in the first place? Why invite tourists into the glowing pink rooms with the endless shoes and the runways and the sugary treats that never get eaten? (This is a rhetorical question: The answer is $29 tickets and a gigantic gift shop.)

I have a modest fantasy in which Mattel and co. stop using the word “dream” as their get-out-of-jail free card. But while it’s a pleasant thought and good imaginative exercise, sometimes you need more than fantasy. Sometimes you need to wake up and get to work.

Slate

_________________
Whispered words of wisdom,
Let it be.

~~ John Lennon


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 8:53 am 
orange is a state of mind

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 2530
I honestly don't see the problem with Barbie or the new dream house attraction. I think it looks like a fun time for little kids! I had tons and tons of Barbies as a kid an I can honestly say they had no effect either positive or negative on my body image/future Ed. They are toys.

I also fail to see how the story of "fat Alfie" has any correlation with Barbie. I think kids learn to "shun" fat people from their parents/adults around them. I don't think one can blame Barbie for that. She is just a toy. Just like a video game cannot make you violent, a Barbie can't make you eating disordered or "fatist" as the article called it.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 10:38 am 
orange you prolific
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:42 pm
Posts: 3972
Location: US
I most certainly pretended to be an engineer, a scientist, a doctor at that age. Having the options of supermodel or pop star is what irritated me most about this article.

_________________
-she learned a simple, obvious thing she had always known, and everyone knew. that a person is, among all else, a material thing, easily torn, not easily mended.


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 10:49 am 
orange is a state of mind

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 2530
chickadee wrote:
I most certainly pretended to be an engineer, a scientist, a doctor at that age. Having the options of supermodel or pop star is what irritated me most about this article.


They could have offered more options. I mean you can buy Barbie accessories to make her a scientist, Gardner, gymnast, etc. why not add that to the attraction?


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 11:13 am 
power lies within
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 9:00 pm
Posts: 6147
Something about a giant pink house with a bunch of virtual shit in it grooming little girls into housewives or whatever the fuck Barbie is seems so Stepford Wives.

_________________
bubbles to the chandelier


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 2:57 pm 
i bite back hardcore

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:40 am
Posts: 412
Location: Ireland
My daughter was given a box set of Barbie jigsaws at Christmas. The 'Lifegaurd' Barbie would have been at home on Baywatch. Then there was, Ballet-dancer, Vet, Movie Star, Pop Star, and Police Officer among others. So, a few career options beyond the Dreamhouse ones. Um, except the Police Officer was wearing hotpants!!! Or at least quite short shorts. Definitely not standard Law Enforcement uniform!! I sneakily binned it last week as she'd lost some pieces.
Here's a link to it, but hard to see the pictures.
http://int.debenhams.com/no/product/bar ... 010848299/

_________________
... participating in such an odyssey involves a willingness to travel like Dante or Persephone into and through the dark unknown, and only then to emerge into a previously unsuspected fullness.

Saki Santorelli


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2013 2:39 am 
admin goddess from hell
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 12363
More on idealised images and toys marketed at children:

Quote:
Are superheroes and video games affecting boys' body image?
By Naomi Perks
June, 17 2013

Two months before I became pregnant with my son, I defended a Master’s thesis on the representation of masculinity in the media. I had spent the past five years researching how the male body is depicted in the media – everything from magazines to toys – and I discovered some interesting tidbits. Turns out Barbie isn’t the only doll with unnatural dimensions. Did you know that if G.I. Joe were real, his biceps would be 27 inches, a size that is apparently impossible to achieve naturally? Not to mention a washboard stomach that would make even Ryan Gosling envious. Suffice to say that when I discovered I was carrying a baby boy, my search for ‘healthy’ body image toys for boys became a big focus for me.

I remain disheartened by the ubiquity of über male bodies in toys for boys. G.I. Joe, Batman, Superman, Power Rangers and even Rescue Heroes are created with dysmorphic body types. At a recent preschooler Halloween party, I noted not one girl was wearing pink, and only one was dressed as a “princess” sporting the traditional blue Cinderella dress. For the boys, however, superhero was the dominating theme. Towel capes and T-shirts emblazoned with “S” would not suffice. Instead, their costumes were replete with fake six-pack abs, biceps and pecs. Would we let our daughters strut around with fake bums and breasts? Of course not! So I ask you, why is it OK for our boys to strut around in fake muscles?

Much has been written and said about the unhealthy way that girls internalize unrealistic body images, but neither are boys immune to the images they see and the body types they normalize. A 2008 McCreary Centre Society study found that only 19 percent of boys in Grades 7 to 12 reported being satisfied with their body image, while 31 percent of healthy weight boys were trying to gain weight.

These figures suggest that boys want to look like the images they see in their toys and on TV. According to Paul Gallant, an eating disorders researcher in Vancouver, factors contributing to boys with eating disorders include “pressures to fit in at school and an unhappiness with their own bodies” when compared with friends who had the “perfect body.” Sound familiar?

You may be asking yourself, is it really that bad if my son wants to exercise and be healthy? No, but the problem arises when unattainable images, low self-esteem and body dissatisfaction combine to develop into something bigger. It’s when boys start to feel as though they are not good just as they are, or when, as Dr. Takashi Hirata, a primary care physician in the U.S., writes, “when the focus is on conforming to an ideal – not about having a healthy body.”

Eating disorders in boys

What were once thought of as ‘girls’ problems, anorexia and other eating and body image disorders are becoming a growing concern for boys. According to Paul Gallant, one in four people in Canada with eating disorders are male. That doesn’t include those with body image disorders such as “bigorexia”, which primarily affects males. As the name suggests, the sufferer strives to gain more and more muscle rather than to lose weight.

When it comes to eating disorders, boys are subject to several disadvantages compared to girls. According to Hugo Schwyzer, a professor of history and gender studies at Pasadena City College and a former columnist at The Good Men Project Magazine, “boys are not taught to articulate feelings and emotions the way girls are, because to do so would be seen as feminine.”

Further, eating disorders have traditionally been associated with girls, making it more diffi cult for young boys to seek help without fear of being perceived as too feminine. There is also a lack of understanding in the medical profession of identifying and treating males with eating disorders. Paul’s research reveals that some men have been turned away from treatment, told by a doctor that anorexia is a women’s disorder and it’s not the problem.

Though Paul says that in the last five years he has seen increased awareness that males can suffer from eating disorders, he says we are still a long way from being able to adequately assist boys who suffer from these disorders, and there are still health professionals who are not aware that males can be afflicted.

Perhaps most damning is what Hugo calls the “lack of diversity when it comes to desirable male body types found in mainstream media of men.” While in the last few years there has been a growing trend of diversifying the body shapes and sizes of female models (from Spain’s ban on ultra-thin models of the catwalk to Dove’s “Campaign for Real Beauty”), Hugo notes “there is no such thing as a plus-size male model – all the guys have six-pack abs.”

So, what can we do about it? As with girls, we need to start the dialogue with boys early. Let them know that Batman is a character. Hugo recommends fi nding local heroes that your child can associate with and see that their body is ‘normal’.

It is impossible to shield your little boy from all those body images that are unattainable and unhealthy. Your son will come into contact with all sorts of media images you may not approve of. When my son was three I didn’t think super heroes were appropriate, but that didn’t stop him from playing “Spider-Man” and “Iron Man”. He picked it up from kids at the daycare, the playground and friends’ houses. Hugo suggests that rather than trying to play gatekeeper, parents need to be allies. “Don’t forbid; engage,” he says. Talk to your kids. Find out what they like about a certain action hero.

“When there is a gatekeeper, a child will look for ways to get around it, and they will still be bombarded with it. Then when they do encounter the destructive messages in the media, they encounter it secretively, and without a safe adult to talk to about it.” If you are an ally, on the other hand, your child will turn to you to discuss what they are seeing.

When it comes to talking to your son about what a normal and healthy body type is, Kym Stewart, a PhD candidate in the Simon Fraser University Faculty of Education in Vancouver says, “the more diversity they see the more children won’t take one ‘way’ as natural.” A diet of only superheroes and princesses is sure to give your child a warped sense of what they should aspire to. Visit the library or talk to your school or daycare to see what other age appropriate books or TV your child may enjoy.

Encourage media literacy

It is important to remain engaged with your child when he is watching TV, says Kym. She recommends sitting with your children and even “talking back” to the TV and discussing what is being viewed. And don’t forget the commercials and product placements. Comments like “remember when we tried that dish soap – it sure didn’t work like that!” help show young children the difference between the real world and the make believe world found on the TV.

Says Kym, “These little conversations help children pick apart the message and provide a role model who values talking back and critiquing what is seen on TV.” It is never too early to start discussions like this and they need not only be around the topic of body image. Teaching children to be media literate involves teaching them to think critically about everything they encounter.

The images and messages children encounter in their daily lives are not innocuous. They can have very real and dangerous repercussions if left unchecked. But banning certain toys or programs may not be the right approach. Instead, engaging with our children and teaching them not to take everything they see at face value can help mitigate any potentially damaging effects. Open and frank discussions with your child can help teach them healthy habits. It may just be what saves them from comparing themselves to the unattainable images they view daily.

I still don’t like the idea of my son dressing up as a six-pack adorned Batman, however I do understand the importance of respecting his likes and fi nding a happy medium – respecting him enough to talk about the toys and superheroes he likes and fi nding ways to remind him that muscles don’t make the hero, but kind and brave actions do.

Is your son at risk of an eating disorder, such as anorexia, bulimia or binge eating?
Watch for:

* Negative comments about his own body or comparing his body to someone else’s
* Sudden changes in appetite, such as eating less
* Fluctuations in his weight
* Frequently weighs himself
* Over-exercises or is obsessed with building muscle
* Anxiety, depression or mood swings
* Social withdrawal


Signs of "bigorexia":

* Distorted self image
* Misses social events, skips school or work and cancels plans with family/friends to workout
* Never satisfied with the muscular mass of his body
* Maintains a strict, high-protein and low-fat diet
* Uses excessive amounts of food supplements
* Frequently looks at himself in the mirror
* Steroid abuse
* Avoids situations where his body might be exposed
* Works out, despite an injury
* Maintains extreme workout methods

Naomi Perks is a writer based in New Westminster, B.C. She is doing her best to keep her six- and four-year-old out of the clutches of Batman and Barbie (to name a few).

ParentsCanada

_________________
Whispered words of wisdom,
Let it be.

~~ John Lennon


Top
Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Barbie - and other children's toys: harmless or not?
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2013 5:03 pm 
i bite back hardcore

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:40 am
Posts: 412
Location: Ireland
How Barbie would look if she were based on more 'average' dimensions:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3529460

_________________
... participating in such an odyssey involves a willingness to travel like Dante or Persephone into and through the dark unknown, and only then to emerge into a previously unsuspected fullness.

Saki Santorelli


Top
Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Moderator: post-mods Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Theme created StylerBB.net & kodeki