Author Archives: margotmagowan

In ‘Planes’ males soar, females get grounded

Posted on by
23

I’ve blogged twice about the sexist preview for “Planes,” and after seeing the movie today, I’m afraid I’ve got to blog about this awful scene once more. The sexist scene actually opens the movie. It sets the tone for the whole film, which is the opposite of what I thought the scene was going to do. When I saw the preview, I thought the plane who mocks the slow flyers by calling them “ladies,” was having a moment of arrogance. The movie would redeem him when he went through his transition. I couldn’t have been more wrong. The sexist joke is his fantasy, the fantasy of a humble crop duster with a fear of heights who wishes he were a racer. The scene is sexism in fantasy world in sexism in fantasy world. Isn’t that meta? It’s the dream sequence of a “likeable” character. Can you imagine a hero making a racist joke and being likeable? In a movie for little kids? Yet, that’s how much sexism we have to wade through before females are allowed to win a race in animation. Here’s the text/ preview:

Plane One: What’s taking this guy so long? Is he really as good as he says he is?

Plane Two: No, better.

Plane One: Whoa! Who was that?

Plane Three: (Descending fast on top of the other two) Well, hello ladies. Ready to lose?

Plane Three goes on to leave the “ladies” in the dust.

Following this sexist fantasy, the narrative progresses exactly as “Turbo” does. (As I’m writing this, I’m thinking “Turbo” also starts with a fantasy about being in the Indy 500. Am I right?) The male protagonist, Dusty, is told by his friend he’ll never be a racer: “That’s not what you’re built for.” Same conversation Turbo has with his brother who tells him that he’s a snail, he can’t race. Guess who proves him wrong, that he can do anything, soar to the highest heights, be brave, courageous, and dare to make his dreams come true?

There is also a strikingly similar Minority Feisty in both movies. Dottie is the mechanic in “Planes.”

Dottie_(Planes)

Paz is the mechanic in “Turbo.”

paz

Look at them both in blue. Isn’t that progressive? At first, I thought these mechanics were a coincidence. Then I realized that “female mechanic” is the classic Minority Feisty role. All the parents watching can think: look a female mechanic, isn’t that great? And overlook that the roles of Dottie and Paz are minor. They are there to help the male hero accomplish his quest.

The race in “Planes” is dominated by male competitors. There are only two female racers: Ishani and Rochelle. “Turbo” had one, I missed her name.

Rochelle

Both female planes are objects of lust for the males who have bigger parts in the movie. One scene is an extensive serenade/ mariachi sequence that sends Rochelle, the pink girl plane, into fits of desire. I thought I was going to throw up. Everyone else was laughing.

As in “Turbo” there is an evil champion male rival who is the protagonist’s major competition. In “Planes,” its Ripslinger, “the king of racing.” He’s the one I saw in front on all the movie posters, not Dusty. I guess Disney is hoping to market the toy.

Disney-Planes-Movie-Poster

In “Turbo,” that role is filled by Guy Gagne.

guy-gagne

Why not do something wild and crazy and put a female in the evil champion role?

Dusty’s mentor, his major relationship in the movie, is with another male, Skipper.

skipper-popup

My kids have seen three animated movies about competitions this summer: “Monster University,” “Turbo,” and “Planes.” Not one of these movies shows kids that females can win. Even worse, as I began this post with, “Planes” mocks female competitors as losers.

Why do parents put up with this repeated sexism in movie after movie?

There’s an excellent post in The Atlantic today: The Banal, Insidious, Sexism of Smurfette. I haven’t seen “Smurfs 2” which came out last week. The post begins:

In The Smurfs 2, there are a lot of Smurfs. And they all have names based on their unique qualities. According to the cast list, the male ones are Papa, Grouchy, Clumsy, Vanity, Narrator, Brainy, Handy, Gutsy, Hefty, Panicky, Farmer, Greedy, Party Planner, Jokey, Smooth, Baker, Passive-Aggressive, Clueless, Social, and Crazy. And the female one is Smurfette–because being female is enough for her. There is no boy Smurf whose identifying quality is his gender, of course, because that would seem hopelessly limited and boring as a character.

These characters, originating as they did in mid-century Europe, exhibit the quaint sexism in which boys or men are generic people–with their unique qualities and abilities–while girls and women are primarily identified by their femininity. The Smurfs 2, which premiered last weekend and came in third at the box office, doesn’t upend the premise of Smurfette…Today, a blockbuster children’s movie can invoke 50-year-old gender stereotypes with little fear of a powerful feminist backlash.

 

Please go to The Atlantic and read the post. The art accompanying it is great. But the author doesn’t expand beyond “Smurfs 2” as far as the sexism marketed to children in movies this summer. The erasure of female characters is shockingly consistent. And shocking in that it’s not shocking. Not only is there no fear of powerful feminist backlash, when I write about this annihilation in kids’ movies, I get comments like: You call yourself a feminist? Why don’t you write about something more important than cartoons? Who cares?

Kids learn from what they see. Brains seek out patterns and repetition. You can tell girls that they can be anything they want to be until you’re Smurfblue in the face, but if you don’t show them, your words are meaningless. A crop duster can win a flying race around the world and a snail can win the Indy 500, but a female can’t win a thing? “You aren’t what you’re built to be” unless you happen to be built a girl. Suddenly, your options become pretty limited. Why is the imaginary world, a place where anything should be possible, sexist? Why aren’t more parents demanding equality for their kids?

See Reel Girl’s Gallery of Girls Gone Missing from Children’s Movies in 2013

Reel Girl rates “Planes” ***SS*** for gender stereotyping

 

 

 

New York Review of Books tells you who’s important: men

Posted on by
7

This from VIDA on intellectuals/ thought leaders:

New York Review of Books’ Summer 2013 issue. So, VIDAs, wouldn’t you say it’s time to cancel your subscription or write to the editor or something? I mean, WTH??

VIDA

A couple things really get me about this snobby sexism:

(1) Progressive does NOT equal feminist. A couple weeks ago a study came out that the New York Times, that bastion of liberalism, quotes 3.4 men for every woman. Slate reports:

The endless trend pieces about how women accessorize, parent, and hook up today have failed to materialize into equal representation across the newspaper. In the Times, men are individuals who are quoted to represent countries, corporations, academics, and citizens; women are quoted to represent other women.

 

The UNLV students who did this study conducted a similar study in 2010 about NPR with similar results. Did you read that part about NPR?

I write a lot about how PBS, the “education/ liberal/ progressive” station is just as male focused in its shows for kids as Disney.

(2) Feminine does NOT equal artsy unless absolutely no status is involved. If you are in kidworld, you deal a lot with stereotypes about how boys are active and girls are artsy, as if this is a biological truth. This “reality” has nothing to do with biology and everything to do with raising, affirming, and validating quiet and well-behaved girls. When it comes to artists in the grown-up world with big shows who make lots of money, they’re almost all men. J. K. Rowling, already hiding her gender with one name, just used a made up male name to write a detective story. Don’t get me started on “chicklit” versus literary geniuses. Who decides who is a genius? Why, the New York Review of Books, of course!

To complain email editor@nybooks.com or Tweet:  Where are the women? #NotBuyingIt

New video on sexualization of girls shows influence of media on kids

Posted on by
6

Tina Wolridge sent me this message:

I work for the American Psychological Association. This is my work project. This video titled, “GIRLS TALK: SEXUALIZATION OF GIRLS”, shows the reactions and commentary of 6 middle school girls towards various forms of media, pop culture, and people who are associated with or directly influenced by over-sexualization of girls.
Can you share with others?

 

I really like the video, and I’m happy Wolridge made it. It’s important to hear girls give their own point of view about what they see and experience in the media. These girls are smart, perceptive, and articulate. They also seem real and passionate, not rehearsed or coached. Watching the video, though, I still feel like these girls believe there is some “right” way that a woman should look. It kind of reminds me of how it makes my skin crawl when I hear people talk about how this movie star or that one is too skinny. I feel like responding to those kinds of comments, “Fuck you. Can you just stop talking about her size?” I understand the point of the focus on appearance in this video, but it still makes me sad that these girls have to spend so much time thinking about this. Maybe that’s part of what makes the video powerful but I wish the emphasis were addressed more directly. Michelle Obama is celebrated by the girls for looking “right.” It’s good to show examples of the positive but can you imagine Barack being celebrated for his outfits? I posted something on Reel Girl a while back from a Vanity Fair article by Michael Lewis where Obama actually says he only wears gray or blue suits because he doesn’t have the mental energy to focus on what he is wearing. I get that. Especially since I’ve become a mom, or maybe it’s also being in my 40s, but there is only so much brain power I have. There’s only so much time. I need to choose carefully what to focus my mental energy on. We all do.

And one more thing this video brought up for me. Sexuality is different from sexualization. I don’t know if these girls know that. I want to end this post with a quote from Peggy Orenstein on this issue. Hopefully, these girls will grow up into women who celebrate and honor their sexuality. Female sexuality should not be oppositional to being smart or successful. Females, like males, shouldn’t have to make that choice. These girls are too young to understand sexuality but I worry that sexualization has already become conflated with sexuality for them. Here’s the Peggy Orenestein quote:

“Let me be clear here: I object– strenuously– to the sexualization of girls but not necessarily to girls having sex. I expect and want my daughter to have a healthy, joyous erotic life before marriage. Long, long, long before marriage. I do, however, want her to understand why she’s doing it: not for someone else’s enjoyment, not to keep a boyfriend from leaving, not because everyone else is. I want her to explore and understand her body’s responses, her own pleasure, her own desire. I want her to be able to express her needs in a relationship, to say no when she needs to, to value reciprocity, and to experience true intimacy. The virgin/ whore cycle of the pop princesses, like so much of the girlie girl culture, pushes in the opposite direction, encouraging girls to view self-objectification as a feminist rite of passage.”

 

 

 

The pussyification of American society is awesome

Posted on by
2

 

Today, Jezebel posts about the sexist Tweets of “UW-Madison ‘semi-celeb’ David Hookstead.” Here’s one:

David Hookstead @dhookstead The pussyification of American society is sad. Remember when you were expected to be tough, and not worry about what people said?

 

I am so sick of people using female sex organs to imply weakness or cowardice. Back in the 90s, when I was a philosophy major in college, I studied deconstruction and Luce Irigaray and how our language is so distorted, it can be impossible to speak without sexism. You can look at words like “hysterical” which originate from the idea that wombs made women crazy. “Pussy” is another perfect example. Enough already. We owe it to humans to use “pussy” not as as insult but as a compliment. I wrote “You Pussy!” for Salon in 2001, long before Facebook and Twitter. David Hookstead, you are no pussy.

You pussy!

If ever there was a word in need of rehab, it is this feline expletive reserved for wimps.

By Margot Magowan

“What a pussy!” shouted my friend Joe. He was complaining to me about a business partner who backed out of a deal at the last minute. Joe wanted sympathy, but I was snagged on the word “pussy.”

The night before Joe’s outburst, I’d been channel surfing and caught Barbara Walters interviewing Jane Fonda about her performance in Eve Ensler’s wildly successful play, “The Vagina Monologues.”

“You can’t talk about vaginas,” Fonda said to Walters, “and not talk about this remarkable ability they have to give birth. It’s awesome. If penises could do what vaginas could do, they’d be on postage stamps. I mean, vaginas are absolutely extraordinary.”

Listening to Fonda, I thought, “We have come a long way, baby.” Just a few years ago, producers forbade actress Cybill Shepherd to utter the V-word on her own TV show. It was, they said, obscene.

I noted the further progress of female genitalia in mainstream media when I spotted fresh-faced actress Claire Danes sporting a “V-Day” T-shirt on the cover of March’s issue of Marie Claire, in which women like Brooke Shields, Marisa Tomei and Calista Flockhart were asked, among other things: If your vagina could talk, what would it say, and if it could wear clothes, what would it wear?

So pussy power was in the air when Joe launched his diatribe. Suddenly it struck me as wrong that the word “pussy” is used to imply cowardice or ineffectiveness. Why must we equate weakness with the female sex organ? Why have we for so long?

I began to wonder how one — how we — might take the wussy out of pussy.

Is it possible to change the meaning of the word, to restore to “pussy” its deserved glory? Could we use pussy as a compliment? Could pussy denote someone or something as cool or heroic or impressive? “Rosa Parks — what a pussy!” or “John McCain is way pussy!” or “New York is a big ol’ pussy!”

At the moment, “pussy” isn’t even used to slight women directly. It is reserved for men, used among them to make fun of one another. It’s “sissy” for male heteros. It’s the politically correct big boy’s way of calling somebody a fag. And, please, don’t get me started on “pussy-whipped.”

People say “dick,” they say “asshole,” they say “prick,” but they do it with respect. Those words have power and punch, the way the word “cunt” has power. But “cunt” makes people shudder; they judge, perhaps wrongly, the user of the word. Meanwhile, poor “pussy” lies there limp, pathetic and, until this moment, defenseless.

Ensler does a fabulous soliloquy to “cunt” in “The Vagina Monologues.” Perched on a stool in her black cocktail dress, barefoot, throwing back her head, shaking her Louise Brooks haircut, she says the word “cunt” for about 10 minutes, obviously relishing each repetition. But what does she say about pussy? If she said anything, I couldn’t remember. Is pussy so forgettable?

To find answers — and to solicit allies in rehabilitating the word — I went to novelist and essayist Erica Jong, a pioneer in reclaiming language in her own writing, and a recent star of “The Vagina Monologues.”

Jong told me that there are, in fact, a couple of references to pussy in the “Monologues,” though they’re mostly humorous, such as “Don’t let him tell you it smells like roses when it’s supposed to smell like pussy!”

She thinks changing the popular meaning of the word is possible. “If we use it with positive intent, it will become positive,” she said. “I really don’t know how long it will take. Language changes, but changes slowly. It depends on the usage — whether the new connotation catches on.”

Jong warned it wouldn’t be easy. “My feeling is that we’re on the verge of reclaiming ‘cunt,’ a fine old Middle English word, but we’re not there yet with ‘pussy,’” said Jong. “Pussy remains humorous, if not insulting. At the moment pussy is a laugh word. It always gets them rolling on the floors in ‘Vagina.’”

Jong suggested I go to the vagina mama herself, Ensler, to ask her advice.

“I like the sound of ‘pussy,’” Ensler told me, smiling. “I think it’s a good word.”

She agreed that it’s different from cunt. “A cunt is someone who dreams the big dream. You are ambitious. You want to go the distance.” Hillary Rodham Clinton, she told me, is a cunt.

Pussy, she said, is more personal. “Pussy is wet, juicy and inviting. It could be used as a word of empowerment or honor. It’s a feisty word. There’s a little fear, a little danger there — you better be nice if you want my pussy.”

Pussy has so much potential, it’s a shame to limit it to the immature and derisive mocking of weak boys. Let’s give it a shot in the arm! I envision hit songs featuring “pussy” — “Who Let the Pussies Out?” or “The Real Slim Pussy” or “The Real Shady Pussy.” Hallmark-type cards that read “Thanks for being such a pussy!” Colloquial expressions: “You da pussy!” “Stand up and fight like a pussy!”

And when, and if, Joe consummates his next business deal, I’ll be there to toast him, saying, “You’re so pussy.”

Flattered, he’ll smile.

‘Nashville’ brings multiple strong female characters to small screen

Posted on by
5

My husband and I just finished watching season one of “Nashville.” It is such a fun show to watch and not what I expected at all. I thought “Nashville” was going to center on a stereotyped washed up 40something queen of country (played by Connie Britton) usurped by a young, shallow-ambitious bitch (played by Hayden Pantierre.) I was prepared to see one female pitted against another, female ambition demonized, and all the catfights ensue over men and beauty.

HAYDEN PANETTIERE, CONNIE BRITTON

Instead, “Nashville” stars two smart, talented, and complex women who are primarily defined by their professions. Country star Rayna James is in the prime of her career. I was trying to think of another 40someting female in the imaginary world who is portrayed as successful, kind, hot, and a good mom. Usually female characters have to pick and choose, not allowed to be mothers and successful, beautiful and smart (whereas, of course good fathers must be successful to provide and being successful makes them hot.)

“Nashville” is a soap opera. I won’t deny that. But it’s well acted and if you like country music, it’s addictively entertaining.  It also feels to me– though I nothing about it– pretty authentic to the town of Nashville, like we are getting to see and hear about real places. Watching the show feels like learning about a whole different world than my own. Even better, there is a third super-talented female country writer/ singer character, Scarlett O’Connor, in the show.

Nashville

“Nashville” is written by Callie Khouri of “Thelma and Louise” fame, who once again celebrates cool female protagonists in this narrative. Rare and remarkable. I can’t wait for season two.

Reel Girl rates “Nashville” ***HH***

Teach kids Jane Austen 10 pound note when learning sexist U.S. currency

Posted on by
10

In the California public school system during first grade, kids learn about U.S. currency. I was bummed to watch my daughters spend hours studying, sorting, organizing, and diagramming endless stacks of male profiles. I still have a four year old to go through the training. It sucks. While this is supposed to be a math lesson, it’s yet another space where children see that males are important while females go missing. Six year olds learn– often with no authority figure like a teacher even mentioning the sexism– that males are leaders and females are invisible.

How different would our world be if our children grew up in a world where they saw female faces on the bills and coins they used every day? Really, what would have to change?

Well guess what? The land of the free and the brave may be remarkably sexist, but the Bank of England made the crazy, brazen, radical step of putting a woman author on money. Do you think they were closer to being courageous because they have a queen already there?

This is the great Jane Austen. Please show this bill to your kids. It’s really important that they see it.

10-pound-note-1374993971

CNN reports:

 

In the United States, there is no shortage of notable women, but bank notes haven’t been updated since 1929, nine years after women gained the right to vote.

All of the paper money in the United States features men — nine presidents, two former treasury secretaries and one Benjamin Franklin.

Don’t let your children go through this sexist history lesson without acknowledging the inequity. A world where females go missing shouldn’t seem normal or okay to kids.

Here are some tips I discovered when my children learned about U.S. currency in first grade that may be helpful to you.

Show your kids other currencies where females are featured on money. This can be fun. Some money is beautiful or cool to look at. It’s all fascinating. You can learn a lot about people and their countries. This new Jane Austen bill is great opportunity. Let your kids know that U.S. bank notes have not been changed since 1929, 10 years after women got the vote. Ask your children who they would put on money if they could honor someone. Help them design a bill. Play store with their currency.

I have no doubt that in good, old Capitalist USA, when women are featured on currency as much as men are, it will be a signpost, maybe more than any other, of gender equality in America.

Reel Girl rates U.S. currency ***SSS*** for major gender stereotyping

 

My three daughters review ‘Turbo’

Posted on by
7

You’ve heard it all from me before. Basically, if you added up all of the speaking time of the female characters in “Turbo,” you might get 5 minutes of dialogue. “Turbo” reminds me of “Ratatouille” in that animators really seem to believe that it’s easier to convince audiences a talking rat can cook, or a snail can win the Indy 500, than a female character can be a great chef, a champion racer, or the star of her own movie.

Here are my three daughters reviewing “Turbo.”

Reel Girl rates “Turbo” ***SS*** for gender stereotyping

A note on Reel Girl’s ratings and gender stereotyping. I’ve seen comments about movies I gave a high S rating to (“Monster University” and “Despicable Me 2” most recently) that the male characters in these movies are not typical males. They are complex. Therefore, the gender stereotyping isn’t that bad. I strongly disagree with that assessment. I don’t see the lack of complex male characters as a problem in animated movies for kids. From “Toy Story” to “The Lion King” to “Ratatouille,” there are great male protagonists. Not only that, there are so many male characters in these movies, heroes and villains, cool dudes and geeks, athletes and artists, on and on, that kids get to see all kinds of male representation. Female characters, on the other hand, are barely there, passive, and sexualized. Females are erased and seeing that repeated pattern negatively affects both girls and boys. I can’t think of a better way to address stereotyping of male characters than to show kids strong females who are the stars of their own movies, with males helping and supporting them on their quests.

When Hasbro sexes up My Little Pony, parents need to say ‘ENOUGH’

Posted on by
33

Coming to your daughters this August from Hasbro, Equestria Girl. First the Tooth Fairy, now this. Can our kids choices possibly get any more homogenized?

Huffington Post reports on the evolution of My Little Pony:

“Equestria Girls,” dolls that are pony-girl hybrids (think “goth” Barbies with blue or green skin and a colorful ponytail) along with a special DVD to be released in August. Per a press release, the humanized figures are supposed to represent My Little Pony characters as teenage girls in high school.

The image on the left is an original My Little Pony from 1983, on the right, is 2013’s Equestria Girl.
my little pony

The release goes on to describe these characters with words like “glamour,” “stylish,” “ultra-chic,” and it is noted that each doll features her own signature “cutie splash,” an individual design that is similar to the “cutie mark” on her pony alter ego.

 

According to the New York Times, there’s much more involved with the Equestria Girls roll out than a DVD:

The new property will get the red-carpet treatment when it premieres as a full-length animated feature at the Los Angeles Film Festival in June. The movie, created by Hasbro Studios, the company’s production division, will then be released in more than 200 theaters nationwide; its trailer will start appearing in theaters on Wednesday.

There will also be a television debut on the Hub network. Do you see how narratives on movies and TV sell products? Are, in fact, created to sell products? Do you see how important it is for girls and boys to see narratives featuring strong, female protagonists?

What really sucks about Equestria Girl is that the “My Little Pony” TV show, while relegated to the Pink Ghetto, features 6 female protags who often get adventurous and exciting storylines. The ultra-skinny, micro-mini clad Equestria Girl above is based on Rainbow Dash. She looks like this.

rainbowdash

On the current show, Rainbow Dash is a jock/ athlete and the fastest flyer in Equestria. My Little Pony fan Kya writes on Reel Girl’s Facebook page, “I feel like if the show’s characters were real they’d be just as horrified to see what they’ve been made into as we are!”

Peggy Orenstein’s reaction, emailed to the HuffPo:

It’s up to parents and those who give a hang about girls actual development and well-being to say absolutely neigh. You want a sexualized, self-objectifying girl? Give her sexualized, objectified dolls. You don’t? Have some conversations with the other parents in your community about the potential impact of self-sexualization and self-objectification on girls’ development — including negative body image, eating disorders, depression, low self-esteem, poor sexual choices, etc. — and choose from the many other toy options that are rising up in response to this inappropriate trend.

Seriously, come on parents! Stop buying into this shit. Speak out against the sexualization of kids. It’s dangerous.

Reel Girl rates Equestria Girl toys ***SSS*** for major gender stereotyping.

BMO from ‘Adventure Time’ identifes as female and male

Posted on by
22

Is BMO the first animated character to openly defy binary gender assignment?

The guy in the video wants to know if BMO is expressive of feminism. I like how watching BMO lets us experience how we fall for various gender stereotypes and makes us challenge not only those assumptions but our need to define the “maleness” or “femaleness” of a character whether she’s a robot, car, plane, or fish. It’s important that a character like BMO is finally represented. Gender stereotyping is all over animation and it’s great how BMO rejects those cliche classifications.

But here’s what’s not so great. I haven’t seen “Adventure Time” but from this video, it’s apparent that it’s yet another show where the two main characters, Finn and Jake, are male. That gender assignment gets an automatic eye roll from me. With females already so underrepresented in animation, I can’t get super excited about a character, stuck in a supporting role no less, who’s only female some of the time.

h/t Charles Kenny

Real Tooth Fairies pissed off, remove video from YouTube due to ‘copyright claim”

Posted on by
1

Apparently, Real Tooth Fairies did want the public to see their marketing pitch about how much money they hoped to make, using a “holiday moment” colonize your child’s imagination.

This from Campaign for Commercial Free Childhood:

Last night, while we were sleeping, six scantily clad censors snuck a copyright claim under YouTube’s pillow and removed our edited version of The Real Tooth Fairies investors pitch. BUT – you can still see what the Real Tooth Fairies has planned for kids in this version. Please watch and share before the censor fairies get this one too!

 

Here’s another version. Please watch, share, and sign the petition below.

Sign this petition to keep these super-skinny, Barbie-princess clone “Real Tooth Fairies” far away from your child’s developing brain.