Something in my presentation that I thought I did well, was organizing my information and associating them with the pictures I used. Also I had a fun "grabber" in the beginning about popular images that everyone could relate to.
There were many things that I would have liked to say in my presentation. But one thing that I didn't get to say in my pecha kucha was about the Bratz Dolls. One parent said "At least they're clearly ethnically diverse. Aren't they better?" The problem with extolling Bratz brand for its cultural diversity is that the lessons children learn from toys are not compartmentalized. When children play with a multicultural collection of dolls with bodies that appear to be anorexic or enhanced by steroids, they can't be expected to get one cultural message and ignore the other
“I witness a little girl who is sexualized- dressed in a belly shirt with a provocative phrase written across the backside of her shorts, her lips glossed and her hair streaked- her playful, curious nature is palpable just beneath the surface” says Sharna Olfman in The Sexualization of Childhood. I would agree that is hard to see girls being changed by this impossible image that the media constantly shows. How can young, developing girls separate themselves from this image and find their own identity? Girls are bombarded with these images of the perfect body through every piece of media including TV shows, movies, clothing, toys, and makeup. Media and advertising is targeting children at younger and younger ages because they know that if they hook them in young, that they will be affected for life. This is good more marketers but can damage a girl’s self-esteem and body image and can cause eating disorders and just a wrong perspective of how they view their body.
Research: video clips, tv shows, books: some helpful, and some not.
I've looked at Representing the Family by Deborah Chambers, which is about how the 'modern family' is affecting children and how they grow up. I found an interesting section about dysfunctional families and popular media representations of the white nuclear ideal. It expresses the differences of how the family is affected by media and how it's changed since the 50's in media. "The 1950s was a crucial period of national ideological struggle in America during the Cold War with the former Soviet Union. Images of a triumphant family and nation were fused with the national nostalgia for a golden era of wholesome family value". For example- I Love Lucy, The Beverly Hillbillies, and The Flintstones. Even though these were quirky, 'dysfunctional' families, in terms of values, they were the norm. In popular culture today, we have a different image of family. We have TV shows like Modern Family, Still Standing, Gilmore Girls, and What I Like About You. "The family is being recovered, revamped and reasserted by incorporating a range of practices... within a new, hybrid form whose meanings are being explored in the popular media. The postmodernist challenges to social theory have stressed the fluid, negotiable and contingent nature of all social identities". So how does this relate and affect the way children grow up in a changing family setting? Since the identity of the family is changing, how are children finding their identity in themselves, according to how they were raised?
Women & Media by Carolyn M. Byerly and Karen Ross wasn't as helpful as I thought it would be for my topic because there were only a couple relevant sections. The section about women and magazines talks about how body focused women are. "The way in which advertising influences girls' and women's sense of self-worth through the representation of women and women's bodies in magazines have received considerable and enduring scrutiny over the past decades in a number of nations... But what they craved above all else was social approval, looking outward rather than inward, and judging attractiveness to be important both for a successful career but also in order to perform the homemaker role". Therefore, women have a belief that ugly women (women that don't fit the mold) don't succeed, don't find a partner, which is the ultimate disgrace. How do adolescent girls growing up enveloped in this way of thinking all the time, break out of the mold and free from this way of thinking?
How can girls (child and adolescents) create a positive, not externally based image? How can we create an environment that goes against media and advertisements that create identities based on looks? What is a solution to show girls how to create their identity not based on media?
The Sexualization of Childhood by Olfman, what does the title mean? This book refers to the derailed psychosexual and gender development as a consequence of cultural values, norms, and practices. Advertising is directed at younger age groups, and have consequences later in life. Even dolls, which were once the hallmark of innocent play, have evolved into sexual entities: barbie dolls, The Scene and Bratz, all marketed to girls ages 5-7. They have a sexually provocative, tougher, and more adult edge. Sexualization of children creates a variety of harmful and lasting consequences: - impaired cognitive functioning due to intrusive and negative thoughts
- body dissatisfaction
- emotional distress
- negative self-image
- low self-esteem
- eating disorders
- health problems
- a culture that perpetuates these serious problems
"Chronic sexual objectification has a lasting impact because it pressures girls to accept an external view of themselves and of their value as people." "Adolescence is always a critical time in identity formation." Young children and adolescent girls are at a vulnerable point in their life; they will absorb as much information as possible while the teenage mission is to figure out who they are and what they want to become.
How has child development changed throughout history? Specifically girls in their childhood and adolescence?
How has the changing family dynamics effected development?
How has media, advertisements, tv shows, toys, etc affected development?
Since last week I have slightly shifted my thesis topic to more specifically child development and how girls are effected by media, society, family, and parents in their earlier years. I have about 6 more books from the library including: - The Changing Portrayal of Adolescents in the Media Since 1950 by Patrick E. Jamieson
- The Sexualization of Childhood by Sharna Olfman
- Building Self-Esteem in Children by Patricia H. Berne and Louis Savary
- Women & Media by Carolyn M. Byerly and Karen Ross
- Women, Feminism, and Media by Sue Thornham
- Representing the Family by Deborah Chambers
"Creative play is essential for all children, strengthening their capacity to process and transform the world can serve as an antidote to the ubiquitous, commercialized version of successful womanhood based on the glorification of unrealistic body type, objectified sexuality, and the acquisition of material goods". - Olfman. "Three constellations of familial meaning can be identified in popular media and public discourses that have important implications for factors of race, ethnicity, and neutralized as 'normal', but it its arbitrary and shifting cultural determinant. Ideal, dysfunctional, and hybridized family are the three categories". - Chambers. These are a couple things that I have been reading that have stuck my interest, more to come...
“The Gap between Interior Design and Interior Architecture” by Henry Hildebrandt talks about how the two practices are different and similar. Both imply the act of designing within either a building or a space and have been adopted to differentiate unique foci of work of the interior environment. Another similarity is that both fields need to realize it is continually evolving within a shifting social, economic, and political culture. It needs to constantly be re-examined and analyzed. Between different areas there is always the “turf mentality”. It’s not as simple as architecture designs the outside of the building and interior designers design the inside of the building; interior architecture obscures this view. However there is a common goal of design: is to make our world a better place. So once you melt away all the little squabbles and boundaries, you are left with a “common core of design knowledge and a design methodology of problem solving geared toward analytical and outcome processes connected to human and environmental needs”. Architectural structure is an expression of cultural principles and deliberate design choices based on current technology and understandings. Interior is that but also a process through a language of reduction. It is narrowing abstract notions of ideas and symbols composed in a unity of form, space, detail, material, etc. Interior architecture is placed within the business of architectural practice, the contractual agreement of design services encompassing interior elements equally with shell and site conditions. The common goal for design work is similar, but the execution of each practice is different.
“A View from the Largin: Interior Design” by Lucinda Havenhand discusses the perceived notions that Interior Design is a feminine, superficial, and mimetic profession. Media and today’s culture sees it askew for example: HGTV shows, Will & Grace, Trading Spaces, etc. And this is compared to architecture, which is perceived as a male, rational, and original profession. This becomes an idea of difference” male vs. female, structure vs. decoration, and superior vs. inferior. The idea that Havenhand states and feminism according to Haraway is to create “otherness”. “If interior design is a truly authentic marginal position, rooted in its perceived femininity, then interior design processes the potential of having this special viewpoint of the marginalized; promise more adequate, sustained, objective, transforming accounts of the world.” The idea is to completely discontinue its practice of emulating architecture. The new identity of interior design would be created by the connections to the body, community, culture, and world around us. This would create a unique language of interiors that would be separate than architecture. Since architecture emulates rationalist practices, so do their drawings. Interior design creates a new language that emulates intimacy and connections to the human through drawings. The result is drawings and designs that strongly reflect a more direct relationship to the body and its place within the depicted space. This is an important connection, and that is mainly how interior design is differentiated from architecture: the main focus and concern of the design is on the client and how people enjoy and live in the space created.
“The Interior Design Value Proposition” by Suzan Globus attempts to pinpoint the definition of interior design despite the common wrong perception of interior design people have today. It’s more than protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public. It’s more than making a space look good or making the space more workable. It’s actually changing the way people live, and allowing them to live to the best of their capabilities. Globus concludes the article with a strong statement, “Interior Designers are able to create environments that make people feel secure, welcome, competent, engaged, and stimulated. If people are living at their very best, they are capable of optimal behavior whether they are loving, generous, respectful, productive, or innovative and characterized by limitless achievements”.
Are some children born good?
How does society, parents/guardians, communities/societies, media affect the way children are brought up?
how has this changed compared to other generations?
Impact of media on children and adolescents.
Mind maps, reading, research, immersing myself in the topic of the way children are raised. Many factors go into this- parents (single, married, divorced), community/society, class, race, religion, morals, and media. The ways children are affects: - intelligence
- cognitive
- achievement
- psychological and physical disorders
- impulsivity- hyperactivity
- social competence
- learning problems
- behavioral and emotional problems
- self-esteem
"Impressions made on mother's minds by books she reads, may prevent or stop growth, cause defects in children while pregnant." "Children who grow up with only one biological parent are worse off, on average, than children with both parents growing up regardless of race, educational background, or married when child is born, and whether resident parent remarries." "Hierarchy of values embodied in the moral vision of family law has changed overtime." "Sexual morality has become less important overtime while protecting children has become control to moral framework of family law." Divorce: bad for children- heavy financial penalty, moving, physical abuse- all at more risk. emotional, physical, mental consequences Married: higher likelihood of high school completion, and post secondary education lower likelihood of early home leaving, and labor force transition "Attention to these issues would contribute to knowledge about how class and race interactively shape childhood experience and family life." Changing media environment in relation to inequalities and social exclusion. More research: The Nurture Assumption: Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do, by Judith Rich Harris Growing Up With a Single Parent, by Sara McLanahan and Gary Sanderfur Journal of Marriage and Family, "The Life Course of Children Born to Unmarried Mothers: Childhood Living Arrangements and Young Adult Outcomes", by William S. Aquilino Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life, by Lisa D. Pearce Rules, responsibility, and Commitment to Children: The New Language of Morality in Family Law, by Jane C. Murphy Children & Their Changing Media Environment: A European Comparative Study, by Sonia M. Livingstone and Moira Bovill
|
RSS Feed