Umm, so all male caretakers of children, professionally or personally, are "outliers"? Nope. I simply think dolls are "girl toys" because child care is seen as a female dominated role and girls might idolize their mother and play to "be mom" (THEIR mom, not any mom). My brother and I definitely played "dad" and did things related to my father's job. Not because we wanted to have that job or role, because we wanted to be like dad.
That is not what I said. My outlier comment was not directed at what I said, but at what you said. i.e. you can't disprove a theory simply because you have an example that seems to be off center.
What I was trying to convey is that studies have shown the use of dolls in adolescence "Enhances" the ability to bond with and otherwise interact with children when we get older. The starting amount (or lack thereof) of this ability is immaterial to my statement. Any "Enhancement" can certainly improve it. It has also been shown that having/taking care of small animals ALSO "Enhances" what could be called a (pre existing) maternal ability.
But since I don't have the case studies handy, I'll bow out at this stage.
I also think it's dependent on what tv shows you grow up with. If you like power rangers (using myself as an example) then you'll want power ranger figures. If you like the barbie tv show, then you'll probably want barbies.
Obviously your interest in tv shows is dependent (once again) on what your parents let you watch, but I also think there are in-grained gender differences that at least to some extent mold our interests. I know I never had any interest in watching "girl's shows" but it wasn't because my parents refused to let me watch them, or anything like that, it's simply because I wasn't interested.
Of course, now there's that new (well, it *WAS* new when I saw it) cartoon about a boy finds/is given a ring that gives him superpowers… of a female superhero, including the costume, with a skirt.
It's SheZow. I have to admit, it was fun seeing people who are "gatekeepers" of deeply ingrained cultural sex roles lose their MINDS over this cartoon. Why, you'd think they thought being a girl is something shameful!
If a child has access to every toy and TV show in the world, the child will still have a preference. And I'm pretty sure that would depend on nothing but personality and taste, not gender.
Nearly every TV show I can recall from my childhood (cartoons and live action) had at least one boy and one girl as characters, often siblings (and a funny animal companion like their dog). That was in the 80ies. I'm all but up to date with today's shows for children, but I guess that trend continued and "gendered" TV is on the best way to become a thing of the past.
@the_spyder - Now, animals makes perfect sense. Animals are living beings, of course it 'enhances' empathy because animals give you something to emotionally respond to (or not, if you are an aspiring serial killer). Dolls are dead objects and take on any personality with any kind of 'response' that the one playing with them imagines. My Playmobile pirates had personalities, too. It's still a big difference if you always get the reaction you want (because you invent the persona and reaction) or if the dog just doesn't want to play right now because it is a living being.
My teddy bears all have personalities, I still make the threat that if any of them "disappear" then I'll kill one of the cats (not my favourite) as retribution.
Animals are living beings, of course it 'enhances' empathy because animals give you something to emotionally respond to (or not, if you are an aspiring serial killer).
My teddy bears all have personalities, I still make the threat that if any of them "disappear" then I'll kill one of the cats (not my favourite) as retribution.
I guess I grew up in a (relatively) weird time in American Cartoons. I mean, I remember watching Scooby-Doo, The Jetsons, Superfriends, Jabba Jaw, The Original Land of the Lost, Jason of Star Command, Lidsville, H'n'R Puffnstuff, The Harlem Globetrotters, The Super Harlem Globetrotters, The Real Ghostbusters (not the one based on the movie with Harold Ramis, et al) but one with a Gorilla. I also remember watching Josie and the Pussycats, a knock-off that was based around a talking Dune Buggy, Whacky Racers, The Live-action F Troop, Fat Albert, Speed Racer, Battle of the Planets, Star Blazers, Go Bots, The Mighty Orbots, Sydney and the Sea Monsters.
(EEK, I was apparently mainlining pop culture as a kid! No wonder I am such a weird Old Lady today! )I am sure there are tons more I don't remember, like Snorks, Smurfs and a ton of those Old Warner Bros Cartoons, Woody Woodpecker (I can do his laugh, still), Sylvester and Tweety, Chilly Willy, Speedy Gonzalez, Foghorn Leghorn and so on. I never grew up thinking there was anything I couldn't do and toys and cartoons were much less gender segregated back then. I built my own towns with knock-off LEGO bricks, Lincoln Logs and still remember the 20" G.I. Joe Dolls. I remember the first cartoon series I can really clearly remember was Thundercats. Voltron, Blackstar, Tarzan and the D&D Cartoon were other favorites. And the Lone Ranger and Zorro (The 11 AM CBS affiliate showed the Tarzan/Lone Ranger Power Hour).
It disappoints me because, while some of those shows were really stupid and scraped the bottom of the barrel, I don't think they really were made to reinforce or set some cultural stereotype. But this could be because of Princess/Agatha Jun of Phoenix Force, who was just as capable as Mark, Jason, Keeyop and Tiny.
It disappoints me because, while some of those shows were really stupid and scraped the bottom of the barrel, I don't think they really were made to reinforce or set some cultural stereotype.
That is something I think holds true for a vast majority of entertainment, yet people like to forget it was made to entertain, not to push some agenda. It reminds me of an older discussion about sitcoms and "how the father is always the idiot and the mother always the smart housewife". It's true if your mind immediately jumps to something like The Simpsons and reinforces the perception, and it's not true if your first thought is "wait, Peggy Bundy wasn't very bright either". For every kiddie show where a boy does a typical boy-activity, there is a show where a boy does something "girly" and vice versa. I remember Disney's gummibears (not sure what it is English) where the boy was pink and the girl was yellow, both had female voice acting and both did the exact things (being friends with the princess, adventuring, generally more boy-things like archery).
All is made to entertain, not to reinforce or defy stereotypes.
Of course, now there's that new (well, it *WAS* new when I saw it) cartoon about a boy finds/is given a ring that gives him superpowers… of a female superhero, including the costume, with a skirt.
It's not a new concept, though it probably doesn't have much (or any) prior use in western culture. Japanese animation has used that particular idea quite a few times. Personally I think it's daft and remember losing interest in a series that seemed promising when they pulled this, but there's probably a demographic that enjoys this stuff too.
The Clanger planetoid appears to have aquired an atmosphere over the last forty years. Someone should investigate the phenomena. Don't forget to equip your probe with spaghetti protection.
And now we scrape the bottom of the Barrel: ElectraWoman and Dyna Girl https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqB36FsglEE To be fair, this wasn't really *any* worse than the 60's Batman, it just has worse actors.
@LadyRhian, you and I grew up on the same kids' TV. Thanks for reminding me of a lot of happy Saturday mornings I had growing up, thanks to that "great" Saturday morning TV.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that in between all these shows, at least the ones from the 1970's, we had "Schoohouse Rock". Every kid in my sixth grade class aced our oral exam where we had to quote the Preamble to the Constitution from memory, because we all knew the song.
@BelgarathMTH I have the entire Schoolhouse Rock Collection on DVD. The ones I recall seeing most often were "Conjunction Junction", "Mother Necessity", "Just a Bill", "Interplanet Janet", "A Noun is a Person, Place or Thing", "Unpack Your Adjectives" and "Verb!" and "No More Kings". "Verb!" is great fun
That is something I think holds true for a vast majority of entertainment, yet people like to forget it was made to entertain, not to push some agenda. It reminds me of an older discussion about sitcoms and "how the father is always the idiot and the mother always the smart housewife". It's true if your mind immediately jumps to something like The Simpsons and reinforces the perception, and it's not true if your first thought is "wait, Peggy Bundy wasn't very bright either". For every kiddie show where a boy does a typical boy-activity, there is a show where a boy does something "girly" and vice versa. I remember Disney's gummibears (not sure what it is English) where the boy was pink and the girl was yellow, both had female voice acting and both did the exact things (being friends with the princess, adventuring, generally more boy-things like archery).
All is made to entertain, not to reinforce or defy stereotypes.
I'd kind of disagree.
In the first place, while it is true that these were made for entertainment value it is a far stretch to say that it wasn't made to fit some kind of agenda. Television and movies will often be created to deal with some kind of social issue or relevant concept in society of the day. Even cartoons will have elements buried deep in the subtext that is mean to have meaning and relevance.
Also, maybe this is just that I am from the US or maybe it is my age, but to say "For every kiddie show where a boy does a typical boy-activity, there is a show where a boy does something "girly" and vice versa.", I don't find that to be true. Certainly in today's world it is MORE true than when I was growing up in the 70s, but back then stereotypes were pretty set. To quote the Immortal Douglas Adams "Men were REAL men, Women were REAL women and small furry blue creatures from Alpha Centauri were REAL Small furry blue creatures from Alpha Centauri".
To take a slight segue here, if you look at the Super Hero genre of movies lately, why have we not seen a Wonder Woman movie yet? Why was black Widow's part in Avengers, marginalized (as some people see it) and she STILL doesn't have a stand alone movie? Why are shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Xena Warrior Princess still by far the exception rather than the rule? It's getting better, but it is a long shot to reach parity.
I don't think we are even close to equality 'Yet'. And I think that society is still (in some cases even more so than in the past) trying to apply stereotypes to the genders. I do think it is AWESOME that we (in the US) finally have marriage equality, but that's been a long fight and is a tangential issue.
@the_spyder To be fair to the Marvel Movies, Black Widow isn't as well-known a character as Wonder Woman is for DC. Neither have Hawkeye or the Mark Ruffalo Hulk gotten their own movies, but yeah, I *do* want to see a Black Widow movie, but again, to be fair, I want to see her as the original Marvel Universe had her, where she was born in the 1930's (or 40's) and she received a version of Captain America's Super Soldier Serum. In fact, I'd love to see that be ScarJo's background in the 616 Universe, where she's been lying about her background all along and watch people's heads explode.
A lot of Marvel's Heroines were… not well treated in their own history. Carol Danvers got, essentially, mind-raped by a villain and dragged off to another dimension to bear his child, thinking she wanted this, and her teammates at the time didn't twig to it at all. And that horrible director who referred to She-Hulk as the Hulk's sex toy, so that he could get it on without killing someone. :vomits: (Paraphrasing here.)
Another movie I'd love to see- Storm's Origin Story. A Red Sonja movie that isn't campy or ridiculous.
One of the reasons I love "Dungeons and Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God" is because of Lux. Unlike the other two main female characters, who are both mages, she's a barbarian and kicks her own weight in monster butts. It just kicks the "Male Warrior, Female Support" trope in the teeth. And I play a lot of female fighter/Paladin/Ranger characters in both D&D and BG. I have a female mage as well, and she speaks to my love of learning and knowing stuff, but I tend to play far more fighter classes than mages.
@LadyRhian - I take your point about Black Widow not being as well known as the others. However, if you go back 10 years and ask random people on the street to NAME 4 Avengers you will get more instances of Ema Peel and John Steed than you would correct Marvel Avengers names. And who ever heard of Ant Man? Or Doctor Strange, or Black Panther? Or Green Arrow, or Black Canary? (I speak of those who weren't raised on comics). I WAS raised on comics so I know (and suspect that you do as well) all the rich back story and wealth of characters that are out there. We are not in the majority.
From the first moment that Black Widow walked on screen in Iron Man 2, she became an Avenger in my mind. And yes, I think that Clint should get his own movie as well.
PS: The reasons Mark hasn't gotten a stand alone Hulk movie are: a) there are licencing issues. and b) neither of the other two outings have been well received despite relative degrees of star power. Even the Ed Norton movie, which was a lot closer to the Bill Bixby Hulk, and got better reviews because of that fact alone, was pretty much a monster mash fest. I think they CAN do a lot better. They just haven't.
And absolutely, bring on that Black Widow back story that you laid out. I'd LOVE that. She always was an unknown quantity in the comics, more of an Anti-hero than a hero in a lot of ways.
I never saw the Dungeons and Dragons movie you speak of, but might have to check it out. The first one was so horrible, I just never took the time after that. And Xena has always been a favorite. I don't understand why Hollywood always has to paint women as wizards and archers. Women can kick some @$$ in my view.
@the_spyder To be fair, I actually remember the HORRIBLE Steven Strange/Doctor Strange movie from the 70's. And the really bad Hulk movies based off the Bixby Series in the 80's ("The Trial of the Incredible Hulk"? UGH. And the one with College Kid Thor? ::Shudder::)
What really makes lack of a Wonder Woman movie Egregious is that she is one of DC's "Big Three". Superman/Batman/Wonder Woman. You think of DC and that's who you think of.
Black Widow, as I remember, was actually considered a villain at the beginning because she was working for Russia. Then she found out she was being lied to and became more of a mercenary and worked on her own. That was her anti-hero period.
Yeah, about the female warrior thing, I remember a quote along the lines of women may not be as strong as men generally. A male barbarian can split you in half starting with your head with his axe. While a woman warrior can just cut your head off with her sword, leaving you just as dead.
I think you can find the entire movie on YouTube, spyder. Just make sure to search for the whole title.
@ladyRhian - The reason that I said the Norton Hulk outing got good reviews "Because it was like the Bill Bixby Hulk" wasn't a commentary on if the Bixby hulk was "Good", but it was what the general public associated The Hulk with. When the Eric Bana Hulk movie came out, it was panned for not being like Bill Bixby's TV outing. And you are right, the two Bixby movies weren't stellar. I personally actually liked both the Bana and Norton outings. They just weren't what the public thought of when they thought Hulk.
And yes, Black Widow as a villain in the beginning in the comics. So was Hawkeye. In fact, Widow hired Hawkeye to kill one hero, I wana say Stark, but am not 100% sure of that. She has also switched sides between hero and villain several times over the years. A lot of heroes got their start as villains. Rogue of the Xmen started out as a member of the Brotherhood of Evil mutants, right along side Mystique.
There were a LOT of bad Superhero movies prior to the current generation. They finally figured out how to do them right (for the most part). Now we need to see more Women heroes because there are a lot of them out there in the Comics.
Comments
What I was trying to convey is that studies have shown the use of dolls in adolescence "Enhances" the ability to bond with and otherwise interact with children when we get older. The starting amount (or lack thereof) of this ability is immaterial to my statement. Any "Enhancement" can certainly improve it. It has also been shown that having/taking care of small animals ALSO "Enhances" what could be called a (pre existing) maternal ability.
But since I don't have the case studies handy, I'll bow out at this stage.
Obviously your interest in tv shows is dependent (once again) on what your parents let you watch, but I also think there are in-grained gender differences that at least to some extent mold our interests. I know I never had any interest in watching "girl's shows" but it wasn't because my parents refused to let me watch them, or anything like that, it's simply because I wasn't interested.
It's SheZow.
Nearly every TV show I can recall from my childhood (cartoons and live action) had at least one boy and one girl as characters, often siblings (and a funny animal companion like their dog). That was in the 80ies. I'm all but up to date with today's shows for children, but I guess that trend continued and "gendered" TV is on the best way to become a thing of the past.
@the_spyder - Now, animals makes perfect sense. Animals are living beings, of course it 'enhances' empathy because animals give you something to emotionally respond to (or not, if you are an aspiring serial killer). Dolls are dead objects and take on any personality with any kind of 'response' that the one playing with them imagines. My Playmobile pirates had personalities, too. It's still a big difference if you always get the reaction you want (because you invent the persona and reaction) or if the dog just doesn't want to play right now because it is a living being.
Edited to remove unintended tone.
(EEK, I was apparently mainlining pop culture as a kid! No wonder I am such a weird Old Lady today!
It disappoints me because, while some of those shows were really stupid and scraped the bottom of the barrel, I don't think they really were made to reinforce or set some cultural stereotype. But this could be because of Princess/Agatha Jun of Phoenix Force, who was just as capable as Mark, Jason, Keeyop and Tiny.
For every kiddie show where a boy does a typical boy-activity, there is a show where a boy does something "girly" and vice versa. I remember Disney's gummibears (not sure what it is English) where the boy was pink and the girl was yellow, both had female voice acting and both did the exact things (being friends with the princess, adventuring, generally more boy-things like archery).
All is made to entertain, not to reinforce or defy stereotypes.
(Especially when aged 40 years:)
And because 70's Cartoons never saw fecal material they wouldn't touch…
The Muhammad ALI Cartoon!
And Captain Caveman!
Good Stuff…
G-Force/Phoenix Force (aka Gatchaman in Japan)
Adventures of the Galaxy Rangers
Space Ghost and Birdman (Long before Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law…)
And Let's not forget Jonny Quest!
Live Action: Shazam and Isis
And now we scrape the bottom of the Barrel: ElectraWoman and Dyna Girl
To be fair, this wasn't really *any* worse than the 60's Batman, it just has worse actors.
Jason of Star Command was pretty interesting. Plus, it had Mr. Scott from Star Trek! (aka Jimmy Doohan)
Edit: I've discovered the answer. Apparently we where protected by a secret organisation.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that in between all these shows, at least the ones from the 1970's, we had "Schoohouse Rock". Every kid in my sixth grade class aced our oral exam where we had to quote the Preamble to the Constitution from memory, because we all knew the song.
And in middle school English, it was a breeze to learn the parts of speech, because we all knew the songs for each one.
In the first place, while it is true that these were made for entertainment value it is a far stretch to say that it wasn't made to fit some kind of agenda. Television and movies will often be created to deal with some kind of social issue or relevant concept in society of the day. Even cartoons will have elements buried deep in the subtext that is mean to have meaning and relevance.
Also, maybe this is just that I am from the US or maybe it is my age, but to say "For every kiddie show where a boy does a typical boy-activity, there is a show where a boy does something "girly" and vice versa.", I don't find that to be true. Certainly in today's world it is MORE true than when I was growing up in the 70s, but back then stereotypes were pretty set. To quote the Immortal Douglas Adams "Men were REAL men, Women were REAL women and small furry blue creatures from Alpha Centauri were REAL Small furry blue creatures from Alpha Centauri".
To take a slight segue here, if you look at the Super Hero genre of movies lately, why have we not seen a Wonder Woman movie yet? Why was black Widow's part in Avengers, marginalized (as some people see it) and she STILL doesn't have a stand alone movie? Why are shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Xena Warrior Princess still by far the exception rather than the rule? It's getting better, but it is a long shot to reach parity.
I don't think we are even close to equality 'Yet'. And I think that society is still (in some cases even more so than in the past) trying to apply stereotypes to the genders. I do think it is AWESOME that we (in the US) finally have marriage equality, but that's been a long fight and is a tangential issue.
A lot of Marvel's Heroines were… not well treated in their own history. Carol Danvers got, essentially, mind-raped by a villain and dragged off to another dimension to bear his child, thinking she wanted this, and her teammates at the time didn't twig to it at all.
Another movie I'd love to see- Storm's Origin Story. A Red Sonja movie that isn't campy or ridiculous.
One of the reasons I love "Dungeons and Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God" is because of Lux. Unlike the other two main female characters, who are both mages, she's a barbarian and kicks her own weight in monster butts. It just kicks the "Male Warrior, Female Support" trope in the teeth. And I play a lot of female fighter/Paladin/Ranger characters in both D&D and BG. I have a female mage as well, and she speaks to my love of learning and knowing stuff, but I tend to play far more fighter classes than mages.
From the first moment that Black Widow walked on screen in Iron Man 2, she became an Avenger in my mind. And yes, I think that Clint should get his own movie as well.
PS: The reasons Mark hasn't gotten a stand alone Hulk movie are: a) there are licencing issues. and b) neither of the other two outings have been well received despite relative degrees of star power. Even the Ed Norton movie, which was a lot closer to the Bill Bixby Hulk, and got better reviews because of that fact alone, was pretty much a monster mash fest. I think they CAN do a lot better. They just haven't.
And absolutely, bring on that Black Widow back story that you laid out. I'd LOVE that. She always was an unknown quantity in the comics, more of an Anti-hero than a hero in a lot of ways.
I never saw the Dungeons and Dragons movie you speak of, but might have to check it out. The first one was so horrible, I just never took the time after that. And Xena has always been a favorite. I don't understand why Hollywood always has to paint women as wizards and archers. Women can kick some @$$ in my view.
What really makes lack of a Wonder Woman movie Egregious is that she is one of DC's "Big Three". Superman/Batman/Wonder Woman. You think of DC and that's who you think of.
Black Widow, as I remember, was actually considered a villain at the beginning because she was working for Russia. Then she found out she was being lied to and became more of a mercenary and worked on her own. That was her anti-hero period.
Yeah, about the female warrior thing, I remember a quote along the lines of women may not be as strong as men generally. A male barbarian can split you in half starting with your head with his axe. While a woman warrior can just cut your head off with her sword, leaving you just as dead.
I think you can find the entire movie on YouTube, spyder. Just make sure to search for the whole title.
It's called "Lonely Man", and doesn't that just encapsulate Bruce's life in Two Words?
And yes, Black Widow as a villain in the beginning in the comics. So was Hawkeye. In fact, Widow hired Hawkeye to kill one hero, I wana say Stark, but am not 100% sure of that. She has also switched sides between hero and villain several times over the years. A lot of heroes got their start as villains. Rogue of the Xmen started out as a member of the Brotherhood of Evil mutants, right along side Mystique.
There were a LOT of bad Superhero movies prior to the current generation. They finally figured out how to do them right (for the most part). Now we need to see more Women heroes because there are a lot of them out there in the Comics.