“Disney Princess Makeover Sparks Outrage: Merida Petition Goes Viral”

Taken from: http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/disney-princess-makeover-sparks-outrage–merida-petition-goes-viral-175251230.html

May 10, 2013

So is turns out that Merida, the rebellious redhead star of Disney’s Pixar film “Brave,” is true princess material after all, and Disney is coronating her as its 11th official princess on Saturday at Walt Disney World to prove it. But wait, there’s a catch.

Turns out that Merida’s only joining the royal lineup after a corporate makeover that’s rendered her skinnier, sexier, and more glamorous than her original spunky, tomboyish self—stripping her, at least in some images, of her trusty bow and arrow, and putting her into the very dress that her character detested in “Brave.” It’s sparked outrage among thousands of mothers for whom Merida offered, finally, an empowering Disney role model for their girls. 

“Merida was the princess that countless girls and their parents were waiting for—a strong, confident, self-rescuing princess ready to set off on her next adventure with her bow at the ready,” reads a Change.org petition, “Keep Merida Brave,” asking Disney to reconsider the character’s redesign. The petition, created Saturday by “A Mighty Girl,” a blog and online girl empowerment marketplace, had already surpassed 50,000 signatures by Friday afternoon. 

“She had a uniqueness that people really loved, so when they took that away, it was a real affront to a lot of people,” Carolyn Danckaert of “A Mighty Girl” told Yahoo! Shine. Danckaert solicited opinions from her Facebook followers before starting the petition, and said she was quickly bombarded with more than 800 comments, “overwhelmingly negative and very passionate.” 

Signers of the petition, who include Peggy Orenstein, author of “Cinderella Ate My Daughter,” object to what they’ve called the sexualizing of Merida’s image, in which the character now appears older, with a tinier waistline, sultrier eyes, a coquettish expression, tamed curls, and more exposed skin peeking out from a bedazzled, off-the-shoulder version of the constricting teal dress she so resented in “Brave.” 

A Disney spokesperson offered the following official statement about the controversy to Yahoo! Shine: “Merida exemplifies what it means to be a Disney Princess through being brave, passionate, and confident and she remains the same strong and determined Merida from the movie whose inner qualities have inspired moms and daughters around the world.”  

But the makeover—put in place, at least in part, to lend Merida more easily to product designs, according to a report in “Inside the Magic,” which covers Disney news—was still inspiring impassioned criticism at a rapid clip as of Friday. 

“My little girl has unruly curls, wants to climb trees, run with wind, and challenge stereotypes everyday AND she is only 4 years old,” writes one petition signer, Kerri Gaskin of Canada. “How can I possibly tell her that her favorite character has given in and given up to become an overly sexualized pin-up version of her former self?” 

Other signers call the new Merida “arm candy,” “unrealistic,” “vacant looking,” “too sexy,” and “vapid.” 

“Merida was the anti-princess for all of us who don’t wear makeup, let our hair rampage free, and prefer to wear real clothes that let us hike, climb mountains, and ride horses,” wrote petition signer Kris Dorman of Utah. “Please allow Merida to remain the fiercely confident young woman who doesn’t need glitter or skin to know she is of incredible strength and worth.”

Orenstein wrote about the redesign on her blog with a tone of resigned disgust, noting that, “in the end, it wasn’t about being brave after all. It was about being pretty.” She continued, “I’ve always said that it’s not about the movies. It’s about the bait-and-switch that happens in the merchandise, and the way the characters have evolved and proliferated off-screen. Maybe the problem is partly that these characters are designed in Hollywood, where real women are altering their appearance so regularly that animators, and certainly studio execs, think it’s normal.”

For the parents who say that Merida is “only a cartoon,” asking, “Why does it matter?” Danckaert says, “It’s sending a message,” which is one that puts forth a very narrow definition of beauty. “This is how children pick up cultural messages about what is important,” she adds. “Young children don’t really distinguish between reality and fantasy, and these characters are their role models.”

“Elizabeth Hurley’s Bikini Line For Young Girls Called ‘Disturbing’ And ‘Inappropriate’”

Taken from: http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/72056264.html#ixzz26wLXZoDM

September 17, 2012

Actress Elizabeth Hurley calls her line of swimwear for girls “fun” on her website. But parents along with a child protection charity in the U.K. have had a different reaction — they’re accusing Hurley and her brand of sexualizing young girls.

“It is very disturbing to see some inappropriate items in this swimwear range,” Claude Knight, the director of the charity Kidscape told the Daily Mail.

Knight points out pieces like the “Mini Cha Cha Bikini,” an animal-print two-piece for girls under 8 and the “Collete Bikini,” a suit that is held together by a gold ring and is meant specifically “for girls [ages 8-13] who want to look grown up.” According to the company’s website, “This bikini looks fab with our cheetah ruffled skirt.”

Siobhan Freegard, founder of the community Netmums told the Daily Mail that she knows “a number of mothers who are concerned about the sexualization of their children and would be horrified by their daughters dressing like mini-strippers.”

And, their concerns are validated by science. A recent study found that girls as young as 6 think of themselves as sex objects and want to be considered sexy. In an earlier study, Psychologists named clothing as a factor that encourages these youngsters to objectify themselves. This research was particularly disturbing given that “almost a third of girls’ clothing for sale at 15 major retailers [had] sexualizing characteristics.”

Knight told Sky News that Hurley shouldn’t take all of the blame now. Rather, the fashion industry should stop making clothes for kids that are so adult-like.

Jen M.L., a mother of two who blogs at “People I Want To Punch In The Throat” agrees on that front. In a HuffPost blog, Jen says she is “horrified” by clothing selections when she takes her 4-year-old daughter shopping. She recounts a specific Easter shopping trip when ”there were several dresses that looked like they should come with a complimentary pole and hooker heels!” But, Jen doesn’t blame the industry entirely. She also writes that consumers — parents specifically — should stop buying and supporting the production of such items. “If we’d just stop buying this misogynistic whore-wear maybe companies would stop trying to sell it to us.”

With regard to Hurley’s line, a spokesperson told the Daily Mail that the collection has sold “extremely well.” He added, “Most of our customers are repeat customers who report that their kids adore the designs.”

“‘I Am Me’ by Willow Smith”

Loving the lyrics to this empowering ballad :) 

“I Am Me” by Willow Smith

Taken from: http://www.onlylyrics.com/willow-smith-lyrics-1092218.php

[chorus]
I’m meee, I’m mee, and that’s all I can be
I’m meee, I’m eee, it’s my one ability
I’m free
And you can’t stop meee,
I’m free, and that’s all I can be

Days pass, I’m tryna find who I really am
I’ve been looking
People don’t like the way I dress
So it won’t matter, I’ve been looking
I’ve done my hair and it’s not just that easy
I’ve been looking
Your validation it’s not just that important to me

[Chorus]
I’m meee, I’m mee, and that’s all I can be
I’m meee, I’m eee, it’s my one ability
I’m free
And you can’t stop meee,
I’m free, I’m meee, and that’s all I can be

Night falls and I find it here I am in peace
I’ve been looking
Making friends with spirits lost
And it sets me free, I’ve been looking
Express myself cause it’s my liberty
I’ve been looking
Your validation it’s not just that important to me

[Chorus]
I’m meee, I’m mee, and that’s all I can be
I’m meee, I’m eee, it’s my one ability
I’m free
And you can’t stop meee,
I’m meee, I’m free, and that’s all I can be

I am me, I am me, I am me
I am free, I am free, I am free
I am me, I am me, I am me
I am free, I am free, X 2

Ooooooooooooohhhhhhh

Create yourself, redo yourself
Renew yourself
Be you, do what you do,
Hold your head up high, everything’s gonna alright
You’re you, I’m me, let’s livei n harmony
Coexist with each other, love each other
Be yourself
You have to be yourself, be real, be honest
Cause ain’t nobody got time for that
They really don’t, so listen to me
Listen to this song, because this is real facts
That will help you move along, yeah
That’s all I wanted to say, so I love you guys so much
Hope you like the song and you know, yolo, misfits, argh haha.

Disney’s (Not-So) Hidden Messages for Girls

Thanks George Takei for posting this!

“This may be where it starts for little girls. Parents, think about the messages your children receive.”

“Teen Girl Petitions Seventeen Magazine to Stop Airbrushing Models”

Taken from: http://shine.yahoo.com/beauty/teen-girl-petitions-seventeen-magazine-stop-airbrushing-models-130000558.html

May 2, 2012

Julia Bluhm, 14, is an eighth grader from rural Waterville, Maine. She loves ballet and attends class six days a week. She is also gaining national attention as an activist who is challenging the media to take responsibility for the way it warps girls’ self-esteem.

“I’ve always noticed how a lot of the images in magazines look photo-shopped,” Bluhm tells Yahoo! Shine. She wants all girls to feel comfortable in their own skin. “Girls shouldn’t compare themselves to pictures in magazines,” she says. “Because they are fake.”

Eleven days ago, she launched a petition to ask one of her favorite magazines, Seventeen, to feature one un-retouched photo shoot a month. “They have already done a lot to help girls improve their body image. TheirBody Peace feature is great. I thought that they could take it one step further with an unaltered photo spread.” This morning, she is leading a protest outside of Seventeen’s offices in Manhattan which will include a mock fashion shoot.”I’m a little nervous. But excited.”

Julia BluhmBluhm started blogging about girls and self-esteem a year ago when she joined SPARK, a non-profit organization for 13 to 22 year-olds that calls itself a “girl-fueled activist movement to demand an end to the sexualization of women and girls in media.” One of SPARKS’ recent accomplishments was to get a meeting to with top LEGO executives to discuss, among other issues, the LEGO Friends line of toys which they say are demeaning to girls. However, the petition is, as Bluhm puts it, “my first big action.”

Her petition on change.org reads:

“To girls today, the word ‘pretty’ means skinny and blemish-free. Why is that, when so few girls actually fit into such a narrow category? It’s because the media tells us that ‘pretty’ girls are impossibly thin with perfect skin.

Here’s what lots of girls don’t know. Those ‘pretty women’ that we see in magazines are fake. They’re often photo-shopped, airbrushed, edited to look thinner, and to appear like they have perfect skin. A girl you see in a magazine probably looks a lot different in real life….I’ve been fighting to stop magazines, toy companies, and other big businesses from creating products, photo spreads and ads that hurt girls and break our self-esteem….I’ve learned that we have the power to fight back.”

The American Medical Association (AMA) backs up Bluhm’s assertions. In June 2011, they issued a press release stating, “A large body of literature links exposure to media-propagated images ofunrealistic body image to eating disorders and other child and adolescent health problems.” Board member Barbara L. McAneny, MD, added, “We must stop exposing impressionable children and teenagers to advertisements portraying models with body types only attainable with the help of photo editing software.”

So far, in the United States, only Glamour magazine has responded to the AMA’s call to action. In its March 2012 issue, the popular women’s magazine told readers, “And while our policy has always been not to alter a woman’s body shape, we’ll also be asking photographers we hire not to manipulate body size in the photos we commission, even if a celebrity or model requests a digital diet (alas, it happens).”

Some stars are also refusing to “go under the brush.” Notably, Jessica Simpson appeared without makeup or retouching for a Marie Claire photo shoot in 2010 and more recently, actress Cate Blanchett revealed her natural 42-year-old face for the online magazine morentelligentlife.com.

As of today, May 2, Bluhm’s petition has nearly 24 thousand signatures. She is surprised how quickly it’s taken off. “I didn’t think it would get this big,” she laughs. Even though she hasn’t quite reached her goal of 25 thousand signatures, editors are already listening. Bluhm says Anne Shoket, the magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, has reached out and asked to see the petition. Fittingly, the current cover features Jennifer Lawrence, who plays Katniss Everdeen, the ultimate girl-power heroine, in the box office smash “The Hunger Games.”

Meanwhile, the eighth grader from Maine plans to enjoy her first trip to New York City. “I want to do some sight seeing with my mom who is here with me,” she says. “Maybe visit the Empire State Building.”

“Disney’s Habit Heroes Accused of “fat-shaming”"

Taken from: http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/disneys-habit-heroes-accused-fat-shaming-232300194.html

March 1, 2012

Meet Snacker: Disney’s newest fairy at the center of a major controversy.

The zaftig Snacker, along with a bean-bag shaped mob figure named “Glutton” and a ball-bellied couch potato named “Lead Bottom” make of a few of the cartoon villains in Epcot Center’s educational exhibit Habit Heroes.

The theme park’s interactive experience and corresponding website were created in collaboration with Blue Cross and Blue Shield, to teach kids healthy eating habits. But after a soft launch three weeks ago, critics have accused the exhibit of “fat-shaming,” and Disney has responded by closing the exhibit as the company mulls a relaunch. And the website is down for maintenance.

“It’s so dumbfounding it’s unreal,” Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, an assistant professor of family medicine, told the Calgary Herald. “I just can’t believe somebody out there thought it was a good idea to pick up where the school bullies left off and shame kids on their vacation.”

In question are the over-exaggerated body types of the villains and their association with being bad. Visitors entering to the three interactive rooms are first introduced to their heroes: The fit, muscular Will Power and Callie Stenics. They’re also confronted with the overweight caricatures, each one a product of unhealthy habits. Snacker loves processed foods, and visitors use arcade guns to shoot vegetables at the cream puffs and hotdogs that surround her like an aura.

The intention is to inspire kids to live healthier, but the message, says Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams, is that “fat people are bad.”

Disney princesses have come under fire before for sending negative messages to young girls about their own waistlines. A recent study found young girls who viewed several Disney movies were more likely to identify a virtuous, aspirational “princess” as someone who’s thin. Consider the Little Mermaid, a movie where the slender main character spends most of her time in a bikini, while villain Ursula fills the screen with her voluptuous tentacled body.

Much has changed since the early days of Ariel. We’re now living in a country with a 17 percent childhood obesity rate. At the same time, school bullying cases and teen suicides have called attention to the need for sensitivity.

While combating obesity through education is crucial and certainly commendable, it’s not as simple as a few cartoons and some tips on diet and exercise. Genetics, finance and family support play key roles in managing kids’ weight in a healthy way. So does self-esteem.

A recent Atlanta PSA featuring overweight kids as cautionary tales, became a prime example of how not to teach kids about weight issues. Shame and fear are harmful tactics when it comes to tackling childhood obesity, because weight isn’t the only issue on the table.

Disney’s Habit Heroes may be learning that lesson. The exhibit has already been shuttered and the website is down for maintenance.  ”The attraction is currently closed as we work to further refine the experience,” Kathleen Prihoda, Disney’s media relations manager told Shine on Wednesday. “Our goal with Habit Heroes is to make sure it conveys a positive message about healthy lifestyles in a fun way.”  Now they’re looking to fix the fail and relaunch an improved exhibit. Prihoda added that the exhibit had never officially opened. “It was in soft open period, which allows us to get guest feedback, prior to the official opening.”

Disney’s rep couldn’t offer any details on when Habit Heroes would re-launch or what it might look like when it does.

One problem with the exhibit that’s harder to fix is its location. Disneyworld has it’s share of restaurant options, but it’s still a theme park. Funnel cakes and hot dogs are just what you do while you wait on line for Space Mountain. “You want to promote good heath? Start by looking at your own sugar and animal fat-laden menus,” writes Salon’s Williams. It’s hard to practice healthy eating in the happiest place on earth.

“I’M NOT OKAY WITH CHRIS BROWN PERFORMING AT THE GRAMMYS AND I’M NOT SURE WHY YOU ARE”

Taken from: http://hellogiggles.com/im-not-okay-with-chris-brown-performing-at-the-grammys-and-im-not-sure-why-you-are

February 11, 2012

I’m sick and tired of people acting like it’s no big deal that Chris Brown will be performing at the Grammys.

I’m frustrated that the mainstream media is covering this story like it’s any comeback story, like an exiled prince’s return to a former glory, like this is another political timeline — as though some rich and powerful old white men in the music business have not just issued an enormous ‘f**k you’ to every woman who has been, is or will be on the receiving end of domestic violence.

We should be furious.

Why aren’t we?

A Long, Long Time Ago, or Three Years Ago, But Who’s Counting?

For those of you who are currently listening to ‘Look at Me Now’ and wondering what the big deal is, a quick recap: The night before the Grammys in 2009, Chris Brown got angry at his girlfriend, Rihanna, and he took it out on her face. She went to the hospital and then to the LAPD, where this photo was taken and promptly leaked to TMZ. (The LAPD issued a stern statement on the leak, threatening penalties “up to and including termination”. TMZ reportedly paid $62,500 for the photo.)

Both Rihanna and Brown had been scheduled to perform at the Grammys the following evening. Neither did.

Instead, Chris Brown turned himself into the LAPD at 7 pm, was booked on suspicion of criminal threats and was released on $50,000 bail.

Then the Internet exploded.

I was a full-time entertainment writer at the time, so I had a front-row seat to the action. This is what I expected: I expected a string of celebrities to comment on how horrific this situation was, how sad and angry they were for Rihanna, how domestic violence is unacceptable in any context, how as a nation we need to condemn this and condemn it loudly.

Instead, Hollywood went silent and, when they did speak, they teetered on the brink of defending Chris Brown.

Carrie Underwood: “I don’t think anybody actually knows what happened. I have no advice.”

Lindsay Lohan: “I have no comment on that. That’s not my relationship. I think they’re both great people.”

Nia Long: “I know both of them well. They’re young, and all we can do is pray for them at this point.”

Mary J. Blige: “They’re both young and beautiful people, and that’s it.”

Jay-Z, one of Rihanna’s mentors, spoke up: “You have to have compassion for others. Just imagine it being your sister or mom and then think about how we should talk about that. I just think we should all support her.” In a sane world, Jay-Z’s statement would sound insane. Why would he have to remind his fans to support Rihanna afterwhat happened is that she got hit in the face?

Jay-Z issued that statement because the Internet was, in early February 2009, engaged in a very serious conversation about whether or not all of this was Rihanna’s fault. In fact, large segments of the Internet had devoted themselves to making Rihanna the scapegoat for any woman who ever had the gall to do something worth getting hit, and then the cloying self-esteem to go to the cops about it. Bloggers and their commentators flocked to Chris Brown’s defense in droves. It was a full-blown tearing-down of female self-worth, an assault on any progress women have made in this country in the past 200 years, and the mainstream media ignored it.

It horrified me. It still does.

Later in February, a photo of Brown riding a jet ski in Miami hit the Internet, and singer Usher was caught on video commenting on it: “I’m a little disappointed in this photo,” Usher says in the video. “After the other photo [of Rihanna's bruised face]? C’mon, Chris. Have a little bit of remorse, man. The man’s on jet skis? Like, just relaxing in Miami?”

The backlash was so severe that Usher was later forced to publicly apologize.

“I apologize on behalf of myself and my friends if anyone was offended,” he said. “The intentions were not to pass judgment and we meant no harm. I respect and wish the best for all parties involved.”

The message we sent to young women was unmistakable: You are powerless. You are worthless. You will be a victim, and that will be okay with us.

The Fall-out, and the Lack Thereof

In August 2009, Brown was sentenced to five years probation and 180 hours of community service after pleading guilty to felony assault.

In December 2009, he released his third studio album. It sold over 100,000 copies in its first week and debuted at #7 on the Billboard charts.

On June 8, 2010, Brown was forced to cancel his tour dates in the UK when the British Home Office refused to grant him a work visa on the grounds of “being guilty of a serious criminal offence”. Less than three weeks later, he performed ‘Man in the Mirror’ at the BET Awards’ tribute to Michael Jackson.

His fourth studio album, released in March of last year, debuted at #1.

In December 2011, Billboard crowned him their artist of the year.

And, this week, Grammy producers confirmed that Chris Brown will be performing on Sunday’s show.

“We’re glad to have him back,” said executive producer Ken Ehrlich. “I think people deserve a second chance, you know. If you’ll note, he has not been on the Grammys for the past few years and it may have taken us a while to kind of get over the fact that we were the victim of what happened.”

Read that quote again. Think hard about what is being said. Here is what this quote says to any woman who’s ever been abused:

• By blacklisting Chris Brown from the Grammys for a “few” years (actually, a grand total of TWO Grammy Awards), the Grammys have gone above and beyond expectations for the social exile of an adult man who hit his girlfriend so hard she went to the hospital, and honestly it was really, really hard for them to show even that much support for victims of domestic violence worldwide.
• It was rather thoughtless of Rihanna to go and get herself hit in the face by her boyfriend, because it’s put such a burden on the Grammys. Maybe if she hadn’t made such a big fuss out of it, things could have been easier for everyone.
• The Grammys think that they were the victim of Chris Brown hitting Rihanna in the face.
• The Grammys. Think. That they. Were the victim. Of Chris Brown. Hitting. Rihanna. In the face.

Hitting People Is Wrong, Y’All

I agree that people deserve a second chance. It’s great that we live in a country with a justice system that allows offenders to reclaim themselves and their lives after their sentence. I’m happy about that, and I hope Brown is a changed man at the end of his sentence. (The US justice system has Chris Brown on probation through 2014. It was nice of the Grammys to let him off a couple years early for high record sales good behavior.)

And my suspicion is that Rihanna has no interest in being a poster child for victims of domestic violence. She probably wishes this would all disappear, and I don’t blame her for a minute. She didn’t ask for this – for any of it – and she’s under no obligation to speak out about it.

But someone has to. Because what is happening here is unmistakable. It is, in my eyes, so unmistakable that I wonder if I’m wrong, if I’m missing something huge, because I cannot believe more voices aren’t railing against this.

We – the grown-up influencers in this country, the people with platforms and with educations and with power — are allowing a clear message to be sent to women: We will easily forgive a person who victimizes you. We are able to look beyond the fact that you were treated as less than human, that a bigger, stronger person decided to resolve a conflict with you through violence. We know it happened, but it’s just not that big of a deal to us.

We were so mad when the Komen Foundation pulled its funding for breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood. “This is not fair,” we shouted. “This is not fair to women, and this is not fair to the women who don’t have a voice, and we will not allow it.” We shouted it so loudly that Komen reversed its decision in three days. We forced the resignation of one of their top executives.

Planned Parenthood, no doubt, has a well-funded and fine-tuned PR machine, adept at galvanizing a population against a perceived injustice. They outmaneuvered Komen easily.

Does domestic violence have a less sophisticated PR machine than Chris Brown does?

Because to me, this situation isn’t all that different. Accepting that Chris Brown gets to perform at the Grammys because some people bought his album is no different from accepting that women without health insurance don’t get to be screened for breast cancer because some VP at Komen is anti-abortion. It may happen, but that doesn’t mean we should tacitly accept it. What if Chris Brown had hit your sister that night? Or your daughter? (What if Chris Brown had hit Taylor Swift that night?)

We’re accepting the message that women just aren’t that important, that their health and their safety and their self-respect is only important until it stops being convenient for everyone. We should be angry about this, and we should be angry publicly about this.

So I want to say this to anyone who is listening: This is not okay with me. A man hitting a woman in anger is unacceptable and is not easily forgotten or forgiven. A man who hits a woman in anger deserves to be reported to the authorities and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, regardless of who might be inconvenienced in the process. A man who hits a woman in anger may eventually be permitted to go on with his own life, but he is not permitted back in my life, even if it’s been three whole years.

“Evolution” – A Dove Commercial

An oldie but goodie.

Featured in Jean Kilbourne’s “Killing Us Softly” series. “Once uploaded, the advert was viewed over 40,000 times in its first day, 1,700,000 times within a month of its upload, and 12,000,000 times within its first year. Even without having appeared offline, the advert was discussed by a number of mainstream television programmes, including Good Morning America, The Ellen DeGeneres Show, and The View, and news networks such as CNN, NBC, and ABC News, with the overwhelming majority coming out in support of the campaign’s message.

It was the favourite in the run up to the Cannes Lions to win the festival’s Grand Prix in the Cyber category, generally considered one of the most prestigious awards in the industry, and it also went on to win the Grand Prix in the Film category; as a result of the win, Evolution became the first entry in the festival’s history to take home Grand Prix awards from two categories and the first web-based advertisement to win in the Film category. The piece went on to win a number of other awards, including a silver Clio Award (in the Toiletries/Pharmaceuticals category), the Film Grand Prix and two Gold prizes at the London International Awards, an Epica D’Or and Gold Prize in the Interactive category of the Epica Awards, among others.”

Excerpted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_(advertisement)

Jean Killbourne’s “Killing Us Softly”

I watched the whole thing last night and it is just so eye-opening, depressing, and inspiring all at the same time. Our society is indeed driven by media and images, and I’m glad that Jean Kilbourne is addressing the lack of media literacy in our society; we definitely need more people like her. 

In this update of her pioneering Killing Us Softly series, Jean Kilbourne takes a fresh look at how advertising traffics in distorted and destructive ideals of femininity. Killing Us Softly 4 stands to challenge a new generation of students to take advertising seriously, and to think critically about popular culture and its relationship to sexism, eating disorders, and gender violence.

Jean Kilbourne, Ed.D. is internationally recognized for her groundbreaking work on the image of women in advertising and for her critical studies of alcohol and tobacco advertising. In the late 1960s she began her exploration of the connection between advertising and several public health issues, including violence against women, eating disorders, and addiction, and launched a movement to promote media literacy as a way to prevent these problems. Kilbourne is the creator of the renowned Killing Us Softly: Advertising’s Image of Women film series and the author of the award-winning book Can’t Buy My Love: How Advertising Changes the Way We Think and Feel and co-author of So Sexy So Soon: The New Sexualized Childhood and What Parents Can Do to Protect Their Kids.

Taken from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ujySz-_NFQ

“Disney unveils Princess Sofia, aimed at toddlers. Why couldn’t she be a mathematician?”

Taken from: http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/12/12/disney-princess-sofia-girls/

December 12, 2011

When I was a young girl, I loved princesses. How could I not? They were gorgeous, sparkly, and talked to small furry animals. But I also loved rock stars (thanks to my gorgeous and sparkly Barbie and the Rockers doll), tiny horses (thanks to my gorgeous and sparkly ponies on My Little Pony), and, for a short period of time, Pee-wee’s Playhouse‘s Miss Yvonne. (Hey, she was sparkly.)

My point is, young girls will love anything covered in pastel hues and sold on a TV screen. So I can’t help but feel a bit dismayed that Disney is banking on the success of a new character aimed at 2- to 7-year-old girls, Princess Sofia. According to the New York Times, Sofia — pictured above — will star in her own TV series, Sofia the First, and film. It’s a character that makes sense within the confines of Disney, a company that owes a large portion of its success to its Princess line, which stretches all the way back to 1937′s Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. But it’s also a disturbing character to see grabbing the spotlight in our modern world, which rightly prides itself on bucking gender stereotypes.

Disregard the fact that Sofia looks like a Toddlers & Tiaras beauty queen. Even disregard the fact that this young princess looks caked in more makeup than your typical Beverly Hills Housewife. All of that matters much less than the simple fact that Sofia only continues to sell dangerous, out-of-date gender norms: Young girls should aspire to be beautiful, dependently wealthy, and the object of affection for a future Prince Charming. And, of course, to Disney’s credit, kind-hearted. As Disney Junior Worldwide’s Nancy Kanter told the Times, “What makes a real princess is what’s inside, not what’s outside … We saw girls have an instant relatability to this character.”

That’s what I’m worried about. It was bad enough that young girls of yore hoped to become beautiful Sleeping Beauties waiting for their one, life-saving kiss when they grew up. With Sofia, young girls might hope to become beautiful princesses… right now. The small screen is already overrun by shows like Hannah Montana and iCarly, in which girls live their lives as famous, high-profile figures. Sofia the First will show a girl living her life as a diamond-clad princess. Not only is it an unattainable image for toddlers and young girls — who, let’s face it, should just focus on being kids — but it’s also unnecessary. Yes, girls love princesses. But they’d also love, for example, a young math-loving character who also enjoys wearing a bedazzled top or two.

Believe it or not, it’s not about the princesses. It’s about the packaging. Heck, even the ugliest toys in history, Troll dolls, appealed to young girls through their jewel-encrusted belly buttons. And it’s easy to sell an intelligent non-princess character — we fell in love with Beauty & the Beast‘s impoverished, literature-loving Belle long before she put on that majestic yellow dress. (In fact, as a youngster, I remember thinking the most beautiful thing about Beast was not the dress, but Belle’s library.) Disney simply doesn’t have to rely on its princess-obsessed history to appeal to young girls. What appeals to girls most is being told they can do anything when they grow up, tiara not required. Here’s hoping Sofia takes a page from her more ambitious, awesome cousin over at Nick Jr., Dora the Explorer, and soon learns that brains are the thing that will help you travel far.

“A perfect fit for those with Down syndrome”

Taken from: http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/11/a-perfect-fit-for-those-with-down-syndrome/?hpt=hp_c3

December 11, 2011

Karen Bowersox doesn’t sleep much these days. Launching any self-funded clothing line would be exhausting enough, but Bowersox’s company,Downs Designs, created an entirely different system of sizing. Its T-shirts and jeans meet the needs of people with Down syndrome. “If I didn’t feel so sure of where we’re headed, I would never do this and risk what we have,” Bowersox said from a hotel room in Xintang, China, where she had been working with a jeans manufacturer. “I feel like a pit bull, because people better step aside and just let me get this job done.” Bowersox created her company in 2010 to deal with a mundane yet agonizing problem – off-the-rack clothing would not fit her granddaughter, Maggie, who has Down syndrome.

Down syndrome’s best-known symptoms are those of intellectual impairment and facial differences – eyes that slant upwards, small mouths, and small, flat noses. But individuals with Down syndrome also have physical traits that make it difficult to find clothing that fits appropriately. The condition is associated with poor muscle tone, which can make some body parts, like bellies, seem droopy. People with Down syndrome also tend to have thicker limbs, a short, thick neck, and short stature. Their knees and elbows are at slightly different points on their legs and arms. An underactive thyroid is common, and that can cause weight gain. Additionally, many children and adults with Down syndrome are sensitive to tight or restrictive clothing, especially around the waist or neckline. This can make wearing ordinary clothes uncomfortable, and there are safety risks in tripping over pant legs that are too long or that don’t bend properly at the knee.

Bowersox said most people underestimate the effect that having badly-fitting clothes can have on the perception – and self-esteem – of a person with Down syndrome.

“Their entire life, this is one of their biggest challenges, and people do not know that,” Bowersox said. “They are forced to wear ill-fitting clothes that make their difference look even more pronounced. When they put on a shirt that fits, it takes away that difference.”

Julie Cevallos, vice president of marketing at the National Down Syndrome Society, said she’s been following the company’s progress on Facebook. Her 3-year-old daughter has Down syndrome, and her favorite outfits are stretchy leggings and loose tunics forgiving to most body types. But she said she’s glad to see Bowersox’s company taking the initiative. “It seems like she is really filling a need that I haven’t seen anyone else filling, so I think it’s great,” Cevallos said.

Downs Designs now sells a line of women’s long-sleeved T-shirts and four styles of women’s jeans. Children’s jeans and T-shirts are going into production. The company’s designers have drawn up designs for long- and short-sleeved t-shirts, blouses, khakis, jeans and coordinates for toddlers, kids, teens and adults. Bowersox said they hope to have the men’s jeans ready to sell by February, and hopes to introduce other items, especially khakis, in 2012.

The shop is starting to attract devoted customers.

“I’ve been getting lots of orders for the women’s jeans.  I just had a woman order her fifth pair. She loves them,” Bowersox said. “It brings me to my knees, when someone feels good about how they look.” Bowersox’s devotion to that idea is why she keeps going, despite exhaustion, mangled pattern samples, and setback after setback. She’s using her house and husband’s business as collateral for money that keeps the business running. “I can’t accomplish this fast enough. I want a complete line in my lifetime. I want suits. I want prom dresses,” Bowersox said. “They just want to look like every other kid.”

“Clothing Giant H&M Defends ‘Perfect’ Virtual Models”

Taken from: http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/clothing-giant-h-m-defends-perfect-virtual-models-173726573.html

December 6, 2011

Visiting the H&M website is not the only virtual experience to be had by H&M customers who choose to order the company’s clothes online instead of inside one of their 2,300 global retail stores. Also “completely virtual” are the models at the center of H&M’s swimsuit and lingerie online campaigns, the Swedish-based retailer confirmed. ”It’s not a real body; it is completely virtual and made by the computer,” H&M press officer Hacan Andersson told Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet in an article questioning the company’s picture-perfect online models.

In the Dec. 4 article, translated into English by U.S. celebrity website Jezebel, Andersson explained the company’s approach. ”We take pictures of the clothes on a doll that stands in the shop, and then create the human appearance with a program on [a] computer,” he said.

Images from the company’s website show models wearing the latest swimsuit and lingerie looks appear in generic, stock-form with their left hand resting slightly below their waist, right arm straight and face looking directly ahead.

Advertising watchdogs in the company’s native Scandanavia elevated the controversy by criticizing the chain of lower-cost clothing stores for their generic approach to models. The Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, one of the most outspoken groups to criticize H&M, accused the chain of “creating unrealistic physical ideals.” ”This illustrates very well the sky-high aesthetic demands placed on the female body,” spokesman Helle Vaagland said.  “The demands are so great that H&M, among the poor photo models, cannot find someone with both body and face that can sell their bikinis.”

Andersonn defended the company’s decision to rely on virtual instead of real models by explaining that computer-generated bodies would ensure that the garments remain the focus of online shoppers’ attention, not the model’s bodies. ”It’s not about ideals or to show off a perfect body, we are doing this to show off the garments,” he told Aftonbladet.  “This is done for all garments, not just underwear. It applies to both women’s and men’s clothing.”

A spokeswoman for the company’s U.S. operations compared the use of virtual models online to the common retail practice of using mannequins in stores. ”In our Shop Online we show our fashion through real life models pictures, still life pictures or as virtual mannequin pictures,” the spokeswoman, Nicole Christie, told ABCNews.com.  “The virtual mannequins are used in the same way as we use mannequins in our stores for ladies wear and menswear.”

Christie confirmed Andersonn’s description of how H&M creates its virtual models, as well as the intention behind the practice, one she said is common. ”This technique can be found in use throughout the industry,” Christie said.  “This is not to be seen as conveying a specific ideal or body type, but merely a technique to show our garments.”

Responding to the fire the company has come under in just the two days since the Aftonbladet article was published, Christie issued this statement to ABC: ”It is regrettable if we have led anyone to believe that the virtual mannequins should be real bodies. This is incorrect and has never been our intention.  We will continue to discuss internally how we can be clearer about this in the information towards our customers.”

F**cking Perfect by Pink/Glee

Love yourself, everyone, just the way you are :)

“F**cking Perfect” by Pink, Cover by Glee

Made a wrong turn, once or twice
Dug my way out, blood and fire
Bad decisions, that’s alright
Welcome to my silly life

Mistreated, misplaced, misunderstood
Miss, no way it’s all good, it didn’t slow me down
Mistaken, always second guessing
Underestimated, look, I’m still around

Pretty, pretty please, don’t you ever, ever feel
Like you’re less than, less than perfect
Pretty, pretty please, if you ever, ever feel
Like you’re nothing you are perfect to me

You’re so mean when you talk
About yourself, you are wrong
Change the voices in your head
Make them like you instead

So complicated, look how big you’ll make it
Filled with so much hatred, such a tired game
It’s enough, I’ve done all I can think of
Chased down all my demons, see you do the same

Pretty, pretty please, don’t you ever, ever feel
Like you’re less than, less than perfect
[ From: http://www.elyrics.net/read/p/pink-lyrics/fuckin_-perfect-lyrics.html%5D
Pretty, pretty please, if you ever, ever feel
Like you’re nothing, you are perfect to me

The whole world stares while I swallow the fear
The only thing I should be drinking is an ice cold beer
So cool in lying and we tried, tried, tried
But we try too hard, it’s a waste of my time

Done looking for the critics ’cause they’re everywhere
They don’t like my genes, they don’t get my hair
Strange ourselves and we do it all the time
Why do we do that? Why do I do that? Why do I do that?

Ooh, pretty, pretty, pretty
Pretty, pretty please, don’t you ever, ever feel
Like you’re less than, less than perfect
Pretty, pretty please, if you ever, ever feel
Like you’re nothing, you are perfect to me
You are perfect to me

You’re perfect, you’re perfect to me
Pretty, pretty please if you ever, ever feel
Like you’re less than, less than perfect
Pretty, pretty please if you ever, ever feel
Like you’re nothing, you are perfect to me

“Teacher Caught on Tape Bullying Student. Is a Camera a Kid’s Only Advocate?”

Taken from: http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/teacher-caught-tape-bullying-student-camera-kids-only-224600400.html

November 16, 2011

Nobody believed Julio Artuz, a 15 year old New Jersey special education student, when he complained of being bullied by his teacher. So he caught the whole thing on tape. In footage captured in secret on his cellphone, Artuz is subjected to curses and berating from a man who’s supposed to be a mentor.

Artuz’s teacher says: “I will kick your [expletive] from here to kingdom come until I’m 80 years old.”

“Don’t threaten me,” responds Artuz.

“What are you going to do? You gonna get a chopper and chop me?” asks his teacher as the rest of the class sits rubbernecking the heated argument.

What Jules did do was show his taped account to his parents and a local advocate of bullied students. After an NBC news affiliate in Philadelphia got hold of the footage, the school immediately took action, placing the teacher on paid administrative leave pending an investigation.  ”The actions depicted on the video do not reflect the mission or culture of our school,” said Gloucester Counter Special Services Superintendent Michael Dicken in a statement. “Our school district takes all bullying, harassment, and intimidation allegations seriously…we do not tolerate it.”

While schools may not tolerate that kind of abuse of power, it takes a lot to make it stop. In a separate incident earlier this week, an Ohio special needs student came forward with an account of long-term bullying from her two teachers. She actually had to attend school wired with a recording device to capture proof of her teachers calling her “dumb”, “lazy” and overweight. Another shocking incident this month involved a high school basketball coach who was captured on cell phone video making deeply offensive, racist remarks about students while in school.

“Statistically about 1 to 2 percent of teachers are actually involved in bullying students,” says Dr. Joel Haber, a clinical psychologist who runs the anti-bullying website RespectU. “There needs to be a clear policy in schools not just for students bullying other students but for teachers as well. Teachers are humans too and this kind of thing does happen, so it needs to be managed early.”

While more schools have introduced anti-bullying codes of conduct for students, teachers aren’t always considered a threat.
It’s a murky issue for many school administrators. Where’s the bullying line when you’re managing an unruly classroom? “Its blurry sure but you know when someone wants to make a kid feel bad, or when they’re abusing their power as an authority figure,” says Dr. Haber. “That’s not the way a role model should be managing a student. “

A bullying teacher doesn’t just threaten to knock a student’s self-confidence, he can destroy a kid’s confidence in his school. “Teachers are supposed to make students feel safe,” Dr. Haber says. When school becomes a fearful environment because of a teacher, students suddenly think ‘well who can I trust then?’”

In Artuz’ case, his phone was best bet. It’s possible nobody would have listened if they didn’t see it firsthand. “When you watch a video like that live, it really creates a different image than if you were to just hear about,” says Dr. Haber.  It’s a powerful defense, especially for students who don’t feel their complaints would be recognized otherwise. It also sends a message to teachers: watch how you speak to your students, someone might be taping you.

Watch video here:

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/133858078.html

“The plastic surgery a model needs to look like Barbie”

Taken from: http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/beauty/the-plastic-surgery-a-model-needs-to-look-like-barbie-2584798/

October 14, 2011

We know that Barbie’s body is anatomically impossible. So why are we still trying for it?

Every day a new plastic surgery promise emerges: scooped-out backs, rear-end lifts, sculpted kneecaps. If it’s possible, it’s suddenly necessary.

But what exactly would you have to go through to get the ‘perfect’ Barbie body? In the latest issue of O Magazine, model Katie Halchishick becomes the human diagram. Posing for photographer Matthew Rolston, her glamorous, Marilyn Monroe-type features are surgically outlined according to Barbie’s proportions.

Here’s a breakdown of what she’d need done to be the kind of doll women aspire to: a brow lift, a jaw line shave, rhinoplasty, a cheek and neck reduction, a chin implant, scooped-out shoulders, a breast lift, liposuction on her arms, and tummy tuck, which would also have to be sculpted as if it were lined in whale-bone from the inside. And that’s just the half of her.

Halchishick doesn’t actually need or want any of these procedures. She’s proving a point: just because our distorted image of how a body should be is medically attainable, that doesn’t mean it should be attained. And if you doubt that anyone actually wants to look like Barbie, meet Cindy Jackson, a 55-year-old woman who’s had 52 cosmetic surgeries to look like her plastic idol.”This is the way I should look,” Jackson told Good Morning America. “It’s evolution. It’s medical progress.”  There’s also 10-in-one-day record-holder Heidi Montag, and a revolving door of on-screen personalities who look more like each other and less like human beings by the day.

Not everyone would call that progress. “The number one wish for all teenage girls is to be thinner,” said Halchishick, a former Ford Model who now mentors high school students about body image issues. “They think what makes a girl beautiful is skinny with big boobs, perfect hair, perfect make-up.”

Last year a total of 13.1 million body parts were surgically altered. Five percent of patients were under the age of 20.

Halchishick, who co-founded the website Healthy is the New Skinny, doesn’t place all the blame on surgery or a pint-sized rubber and plastic doll. She believes change has to start in schools, as well as in the fashion industry. “Girls want to know how to lose weight so badly, and the schools don’t want to talk about it, because they’re worried they’ll develop a complex,” she told The Gloss in March. “There need to be models to show [girls] to wish for more.”  She now heads up her own modeling agency for women with natural figures. She’s also campaigned to get plus-sized designers into New York Fashion Week. But her spread in O magazine, the first nude pictorial they’ve ever featured, has been the most buzz-worthy.

Accompanied by an essay by writer Amy Bloom, the photograph is intended to make women rethink their body image ideals. But it hasn’t had that effect on everyone. When one 15-year-old girl saw this photo of Halchishick, her first thought was of her own imperfection, according to a blogger for Healthy is the New Skinny.  “I thought if a girl as pretty as that has to change so much to be perfect, it made me wonder how much more I’d have to change.”