Packaging Girlhood

Barbie Shows Bratz Dollz How to Drink In Style!

This just in from the Drug Free Alliance.

"Some parents may not be aware that Mattel is marketing a Barbie 2-in-1 Party Plane & Ship Playset that 'comes with all the amenities.' Along with the reclining seats, fold down table and laptop computer, this toy, marketed for 3- to 8-year olds, comes complete with martini glasses, bar stools and a disco scene portraying scantily clad dancers holding drinks!"

Those of you who've seen our power point presentation know we've been complaining about the Bratz party plane for a couple of years now. It has a "juice bar" and Bratz CEO Isaac Larian has expressed outrage that critics have said that his dolls come with alcoholic drinks. We asked, "Who is he kidding?" But now Barbie doesn't even call their drinks "juice"?

Is Barbie different though from Bratz? When we were girls, our Barbies had black sequined slinky gowns that we think were called her "nightclub" outfit. What we understood at the time, was that when we grew up we would go to nightclubs in beautiful sexy gowns. The point is, we understood Barbie to older than we were. And although Barbie presented a pretty one-dimensional view of what grown-up women did and what they are valued for, she still seemed to us to be grown up.

The Bratz dolls are teens and even look slightly pre-teen. So when they party and drink and go clubbing, they clearly suggests these activities to younger and younger girls. Barbie has been following suit, creating a My Scene Barbie who is more teen than grown-up. She's no longer the Barbie we knew -- in more ways than one. Instead of being a trend-setter, she's trying to one-up Bratz. In true wannabe fashion, she's pushing not just a party plane but also a ship! Not a juice bar but real drinks! And explicitly to 3 year olds. Who ever would have thought we'd be longing for Barbie to be, well, Barbie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgTWToOBbfw (YOUTUBE COMMERCIAL)

Packaging BOYhood?

TIME OUT! Hi all, we'd love to get your help on something. You may know that along with Mark Tappan, we're beginning to write about the ways boyhood is marketed and sold to boys through media of all kinds. Packaging Boyhood will look at how clothing lines, toys, video games, TV shows, music, books, etc. are sold to boys and the image of masculinity promoted in them.

To write this book, we need to know not only what forms of media boys are into and what messages they receive, but also what parents are most concerned about when it comes to the media their boys are exposed to or engaged with. Is it the violence in video games, the pseudo-drinking and partying behavior in tween Nick shows, the attitude in attitude tees, the sexually degrading lyrics in music? Are there positive options for boys out there? Books, shows, music both you and your son love?

And if you have daughters and sons, what differences are you noticing in the media they're consuming.

It would be so great if you could help us highlight issues we should address in the book or point us to certain TV shows, video games, or music lyrics you think are good, bad, or questionable.

Your help could come in a number of ways:

1. You could email us with issues, products, messages that concern you and you think we should look more closely at. (Feel free to drop a line whenever you see something that strikes you as really good or really bad.) slamb@smcvt.edu or lmbrown@colby.edu

2. You could go with your son to http://www.packagingboyhood.com/ and fill out our survey there.

3. Or if you live anywhere near us, help us arrange a focus group of boys to interview!

Thanks for your help. We're still blogging about girls...we just tend to wait until we get the urge because something outrageous has irked us again.

Amy Jussel at Shaping Youth http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=969#comment-156406 called this TARGET ad to our attention and asked us what we thought. The ad didn't strike us as forcefully as some, but that could be the point here. The innocence and playfulness of making snow angels (with the hat and scarf, the girl smiling, perky--as much as one can be lying on one's back--in that usual over-the-top Target way) is as primary as the sexual availability/suggestion of sexual violence of the spread eagle position on the target (and the camera angle). Could it be that it's this combination that's so disturbing, the blend of innocence and sexualization? We're seeing more of this all the time, whether it's the VS Angel Collection or the Bratz Dolls (with the little halo over the a) or sexy/innocent Halloween costumes for little girls. These are the kinds of images designed to be so subtly suggestive that people are called crazy or dirty minded for questioning them. But of course in reality they normalize these relationships--i.e., between sexy and innocent. The sad reality is that a girl lying on her back spread eagle is more provocative and attention getting (and thus sellable) then a girl snowboarding or standing on the center of the target in another sort of pose. What do you think? Are we reading too much into this?