What if I told you that this was not a doll, and that this was a real person? What adjectives come to mind when you see this woman? Are they negative or positive? The woman in the photo is 30-year-old Valeria Lukyanova. She is an entertainer and also a model who has turned herself into a real life barbie.
Vice released an article with a video about her appearance, career, and spiritual journey. As you can see she has doll like features, especially in her face. Also she appears to have no waist. (As society would say.)
Lukyanova said “I use my looks to promote my spiritual ideas. No one will listen to a nun all covered up, but they will listen to someone who looks like me.”
This seems to be an absurd statement. Women already have to battle with the thought of “do I look good enough?” or “Do I have to do this in order to gain attention?”
This further proves that in the media sexualized beauty sales and it just s
o happens that SPACE BARBIE has jumped on that wagon.
Also while analyzing the video, there are several scenes where she is expressing that she loves herself, yet she also constantly talks about how she is going to further “perfect” how she looks.
One interesting thing that was noticed is that her sister stated that she does not like the media categorizing Lukyanova as a doll. She says this because it is normally associated with an unintelligent person, but Space Barbie thinks not.
Aside from space barbie, this proposing a serious question to women. In an effort to gain this unrealistic beauty, are you dehumanizing yourself?
Space Barbie please come back to Earth. “/
On Thursday, Mattel revealed curvy, petite and tall body frames for their most iconic fashion doll, Barbie. Sales for the popular doll have plummeted while the dolls have been criticized for their thin shapes. The three body types will also be sold in a variety of skin tones, eye colors and hairstyles.
For readers, the headline infers that the dolls are only undergoing body changes and does not make note of the changes in skin tone until later in to the article. The reporter does a good job at minimizing the fact that the upgraded dolls will be available in an array of skin tones. This says a lot about society – that body issues overshadow issues of race or color.
The visual pictures four different women (Barbies) of different body shapes, hair types and skin tones. In order to increase sales and appease to mothers who are buying the dolls for their children. Appease is the word of choice used in the Associated Press video on the New York Times website. Mothers are being depicted as raging monsters who have caused grief to the company about offering more of a variety of of Barbie dolls. Implying that mothers may be suffering from their own body image issues which has been the cause of the backlash for Mattel.
It is fascinating to me that the new Barbies are getting so much press. I understand that this is a huge business but Barbie has eased her way onto magazine covers and has been talk for the last few days. Is it really that serious? Barbie cannot be the most prominent news story of the world right now. I’m just not interested in Barbie and her body changes. I do think that it is a great thing that Barbie is getting revamped to appeal to more children. Since forever we’ve had the blonde-haired, blue-eyed Barbie that many kids cannot relate to. I wish that when I played with Barbie’s I would have had the option of playing with one that looked more like me. Ultimately this is a business move and not being done for goodness but for profit.
See the article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/business/barbie-now-in-more-shapes.html?_r=0
Please blog on Barbie changes and how your news outlet covered it (or didn’t).
As usual, discuss the images and stereotypes in the writing about the subject. They’re probably fairly predictable, since Barbie herself is a pervasive
On this subject, I’d like for you to give your opinion on the changes, if you’d like.
If your news outlet didn’t cover Barbie’s changes, please choose another story related to women and write about it as usual (no opinion; just a discussion of images and stereotypes).
Cheers and go for it, sle
Jada Pinkett-Smith and Will Smith (left); Janet Hubert (right)
While others agree with Jada Pinkett Smith that something needs to be done about the Oscar’s lack of diversity, Janet Hubert, known as “Aunt Viv” on the Fresh Prince of Bel Air “slams” Pinkett Smith’s boycott.
In fact, Hubert referred to Pinkett Smith as “Miss Thing” and ask does Will Smith has a mouth of his own to speak. Her whole argument against the boycott was aimed towards the Smiths, claiming that they are “part of the system that is unfair to other actors,” due to the fact that the two have a huge production company and a part of Hollywood. I must say that Hubert’s response to Pinkett Smith was a shocker to me, and probably to others as well; especially since I only knew her as “Aunt Viv.” Now after reading her response, I truly believe that she thinks that women should let their men speak only and women should remain silent. Her response to Jada literally was a “Oh Hush Jada!” If it was someone else maybe she would have supported the boycott. *Kanye Shrug* Who knows, maybe she have some unresolved issues with “Miss Thing” and her husband since they’re not the Obamas. However, I must say that others also could have disagreed with Pinkett Smith, but since it was a black woman disagreeing then that’s why the story is receiving more attention. Especially since the media stereotypes black women as “poor, loud, angry, and can’t get along.” The video Hubert uploaded responding to Pinkett Smith’s call to action to boycott may have been interpreted as just that. Although, her approach may have been to state that the Smith’s should just leave it alone because they’re doing just fine without it and people have bigger fish to fry daily, like “mortgages and bills.”
‘Fresh Prince’ actress slams boycott
Photo Creds: Black Vintage Blog
There has been a lot of controversy since Jada Pinkett-Smith’s call to action to boycott the Oscars. Celebrities such as Will Smih and Spike Lee joined the movement, however there’s always one or two that stray a different way. Stacey Dash, however, shocked the world on her appearance on Fox & Friends.
Dash appeared on Fox & Friends to “discuss the OscarsSoWhitecontroversy” which she called the boycott ludicrous. She also stated that there was no need for Black History Month and the BET Network. Her reason behind the response was that it was a form of segregation. This is not Dash’s first time expressing her opinion on Black History Month and BET. Dash expressed her thoughts Patheos.com through the blog post, “Why Black History Month is Ridiculous and Why BET Should Not Exist” on November 2015. Her statement on Fox & Friends stirred controversy about Dash’s intentions of her transformation from Clueless star to “conservative pundit.” In fact, her endorsement to Mitt Romney in 2012 was what drew attention to Fox News to hire her in 2014. Although Dash is standing her ground, it is said that she’s betraying her Latin and Caribbean descent and is “promoting another kind of false narrative.” BET even reminded her of her appearances on BET through social media in response to her statement. So many people see Dash as a “Black Beauty,” but after her statement and big transformation shocker, people think that she’s “cooning” for Fox News… that she’s indeed clueless. Memes have been made of Dash stating that they’ll trade her and Raven Symone to the white people for Adele. She may have possibly made a mistake with her statement, although she thinks otherwise. In the media, women get jabbed at quicker than men for a statement, and it causes more controversy. One of the reasons why is because, people till this day thinks that women should not speak publicly…voice their opinions. However, in this case I believe it was more of a “don’t bite the hand that feed you.” Her statement was basically irrelevant, due to her appearances on BET and I have to agree, she did betray her race in a way. Always do research before making a fool of yourself if you’re going to transform into something that you’re clueless about.
link: From ‘Clueless’ star to conservative pundit
May Sabe Phyu is a recgonized political activist, and she advocates for women’s rights in Southeast Asia. She talks about growing up in a very conservative household. Phyu would hear many prejudices against other ehnic groups and women. Her was very predudice against women and believed that all women should play their role. His beliefs encouraged Phyu to become more involved in promoting gender equality.
Phyu’s husband is not asian. Her dad did not approve of their marriage. He also did not want to be apart of his grandchildren’s lives because they were girls. It was not until Phyu had a son that he talked to her after 10 years of no communication. Men believing women has a place and a specific role sterotypes and objectifies them. It makes women inferior to men. It sterotypes women into submissive characters in society, making them all look weak.
The image that a man is successful and competent is often portrayed in the media. The sterotype is that all women want a family and aspire to be a stay at home mom. A women’s home is thought to be her happy place. They are not looked at as businesswomen and entrepreneurs. After experiencing her own gender discrimination at home, Phyu wants to help fight it around the world. She is now the director of the Gender Equality Network.
The decision to award these scholarships comes at a time of extreme turmoil in higher education in South Africa [EPA/Kim Ludbrook]
I wonder how many of us would have kept their virginity cards if given the option to receive a grant in return for such pure behavior. In South Africa girls are being rewarded for remaining virgins as a part of a program called Maiden’s Bursary Awards. There has been much uproar from women’s activist groups in the country since the program began in January 2015.
Jabulani Mkhonza, spokesperson for the municipality, described the scholarships for virgins as a way to encourage “girls to keep themselves pure and inactive from sexual activity and focus on their studies”.
The women in the article are depicted as irresponsible, sexually immature and incapable of consenting to sex. In order to have access to higher education girls in South Africa are remaining sexually inactive and pure. The article does a great job of showcasing both point of views on the topic.
“Only young women and girls are subjected to this practice. Boys are not tested, and hence are not stigmatized or rewarded for their virginity”, says Jennifer Thorpe, an activist against the program. According to the article the program is designed to discourage women from sex in order to reduce the spread of HIV. As if women are the only carriers of the disease.
I suppose this may help with the issue. Women and girls are agreeing to undergo test to prove that they are virgins in order to receive scholarship. I don’t know, it’s pretty weird to me and unjust to the women’s rights groups who have been protesting.
Interested in seeing how this panes out.
Check the article out here: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/01/africa-girls-student-grants-remain-virgins-160124084216478.html