I’m teaching a Composition II course
that focuses mostly on writing an argument. That means we get to touch on all kinds of awesome social issues like gender studies, racism, and advertising and consumerism. The next class is about becoming a critical reader, which might come naturally to some, but others might need guidance. So, during class they will be reading two articles on body image and the media; the first article will discuss how women are affected, and the second on how men are affected. There will be writing activities to follow.
The primary goal of the lesson is to show the students that you don’t always need to create an either/or argument, but secretly, I am trying to offer them some differing opinions on social issues. Listen, everyone has a bias so isn’t it better to be upfront about mine? Also, the articles, I think, don’t cause conflict, but rather agreement. They are about how both men and women are affected (I would prefer that there was also an article about how trans* people are affected by body image in the media, but I couldn’t find one…), so I am also trying to show them that this kind of bullshit—body image, and many of the standards upheld by culture—is harmful to everyone, so why are we just attacking one another instead of banning together and attacking them?
Okay, so maybe I’m being a little bit hopeful about how the articles will influence the students, but you never know—which is why I try.
Here are the articles. They aren’t perfect, but they work for what I am trying to achieve with the lesson.
http://seedmagazine.com/content/print/the_media_assault_on_male_body_image/
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/women_and_girls/women_beauty.cfm?RenderForPrint=1
PS. Like this post if you want me to keep blogging about teaching. :)
(Source: loveyourrebellion)
"Designers draw for a model who’s 7 feet, and even Barbie isn’t that tall. For the Academy Awards, I went to all the designers and said, sketch me something that looks like a woman, 5 or 6 feet high. I want to see what the dress is going to look like on someone who’s got a body that exists on Earth, not Mars. Because that body doesn’t exist. It’s a trap, and an evil evil mindfuck for women. I did not want to participate in it. I said, if we’re going to play a game, let’s play together."
-Courtney Love(Source: loveyourrebellion)
So I stopped dieting
because I realized that counting my calories was causing me to go hungry. Instead of using up all my calories, I would just go hungry so I wouldn’t have to write down what I’d eaten. Then, one day I week, I’d binge.
To say this behavior is problematic is an understatement. I don’t want to starve myself and then stuff myself. I ended up feeling bad about not eating, and about eating. So instead, I’m going to back to what I was doing, which is eat healthily and exercise, and if I get the urge to have something fucked up, I’m gonna have it. Not all days are created equal, and sometimes I want more food, and sometimes I want less. And sometimes I want a lot of chocolate, and that’s okay.
(Source: loveyourrebellion)
to conform
“i wanted this series to represent how girls are obsessed with looking perfect. i wanted kimmy to be “swimming” in a sea of perfect girls.” — Mary V. Robinson
I find plus size women to be extremely beautiful, but I will never see myself as a beautiful plus size woman.
I think about this all the time. I find women of all shapes to be beautiful, but for some reason, I enforce the harshest standards on myself. Oh goodness, especially in pictures.
Both are clearly unrealistic exagerrations of a female form, as Barbie doll has always been. ‘Cause it’s not a real person, it’s a doll, and Barbie never claimed to represent a real woman, just one idea of femininity. And this is nothing new; fleeting “trends” in ideal female body types have existed since around 1400 AD. You think this as a “standard” is bad? In the 1600’s, it was most beautiful to have an extremely long and narrow torso, a very large forehead, wear wigs weighing sometimes over 20 pounds, and very low, wide hips that only could exist through corset “training”. The most painful and harmful boned corsets and farthingales were worn in the name of beauty ideals (not blamed on a plastic doll, mind you.) Necks were weakened immensely by the heavy and fashionable wigs. People literally broke out in boils and rashes and died from the lead in their makeup. So yeah, “impossible” standards worse than this have existed and have gone out of style, like everything else.
Anyway, Barbie is a fantasy plaything, not an ideal standard for real humans, so I don’t get why we are talking about how unrealistic Barbie’s physicality is when a) she’s a mass-produced plastic toy, not a person b) Barbie doesn’t claim to be the standard for how a girl should look; she is a fashion doll whose prototype began as a dress form inspired doll that was meant to dress up in womenswear for little girls interested in fashion. Along the way we began blaming her for representing an impossible ideal, but did the doll ever claim to represent reality? No! She’s fantasy! She’s a cartoon! And that’s what I loved about her! I didn’t look at my barbie doll and look at myself and wonder why I didn’t look like that. Because no shit, she’s a 12 inch plastic toy and I’m a human being. The comparison is ridiculous. As a kid, I wouldn’t want to play with something that looked just like me because I played with dolls for the fantasy element, because they were not humans in every way, and therefore better portals to use my imagination. So I am not shocked or disgusted by this image, because Barbie never was and never will be realistic. She is one idea of femininity- we are the ones making her the definition. So stop!
Oh hi, I just wrote about this for my Women’s Studies course.
baby got hotter
In talking about beauty standards for the 1600s compared to the 2000s, I think you have pissed the point. The fact that beauty standards exist AT ALL means that the media, the state, etc. are policing our bodies to tell us what is beautiful; what is appropriate; what is a man; what is a woman; etc etc.
Barbie is harmful because it begins a long hate relationship most women have with their bodies. From a very very young age, girls are given things to show them what it means to be a women—from Barbie to Easy Bake Ovens to baby dolls that wet themselves. At 5, we are preparing girls to be women, women that function inside a standard of beauty, behavior, biology, and lifestyle.
I am not saying little girls SHOULDN’T play with Barbie. But! What I AM saying is that mothers may want to teach young girls that this is not what they need to grow up and be. When I was young, I always wanted the brown haired Teresa instead of blonde Barbie because I was a brunette, and I wanted to play with a doll that LOOKS LIKE ME. I think a lot of girls what that. My mother never bought me Barbies, but my Nana did, and she would never buy me Teresa because “she is not Barbie.” Translation: I will never be Barbie. Barbie is more desirable than Teresa. Therefore I am not desirable. Now, I know my Nana didn’t mean to put these ideas in my head, but the point is that this doll did contribute to how I saw myself as a young girl, and probably as a young woman going through puberty.
And really, if you think Barbie has no contribution in teaching young girls what they need to look like to be beautiful when they grow up, take a look at Hefner’s girlfriends; do they not all look like Barbie?
Bullshit!
“In any case, Myers claimed that according to a study, “average women are not actually inspired to look at women who look like them.” She continued: “In fact, they respond more to women who are a little bit above average… There is something always aspirational.” And: “Look, the average woman is 5’3” and weights 160 lbs. You’re not gonna see a lot of that on the runways or in movies.” A hint of condescension was evident — the “average” woman is not dreamy enough for a place in popular culture.”
http://jezebel.com/5529772/elle-editor-average-women-are-not-inspired-by-women-who-look-like-them
Base By: Jahrenesis