I saw these tee shirts on display at Walgreens today and did a double-take. And then I drove all the way home to get my camera. They’re for children– very tiny children (labeled 2T, 3T etc.). And they’re on sale for the bargain price of $7.99 each, marked down from the original $15!!

Let’s see what these tee shirts say:

“Lock up your daughters” on a black tee, which I assume is for boys. Think about what that means for a moment.

“Does this diaper make my butt look big?” on a pink tee, for girls.

“My dad rocks” on a red tee (for boys, I think). This doesn’t make much of a statement until you compare it with the accompanying tees about mothers…

“My mom’s hotter than your mom” on a white tee (again, I think for boys).

“My mom is hot” on a blue tee (boys).

and the clever “I cry when ugly people hold me” on black (for boys?).

While these aren’t quite as terrible as the ones I dug up on the internets a while ago, I’m shocked to see them on sale at Walgreens. I guess I expect to find creepy, sexist stuff online more often than at my friendly neighborhood drugstore.

While tampons have been around since the 19th century (see the Museum of Menstruation for more history), they really took off in the U.S. in the 1940s. One of the reasons for this was a targeted campaign by Tampax that took advantage of women’s new labor participation during WWII. These newspaper ads from that time period show the ways tampons were marketed to women who were not only working, but wearing pants on the job.

These ads would make for a great class discussion on gender and the homefront during war (not to mention a discussion of women’s work and bodies)– particularly on how gender relations and practices can change (temporarily or permanently) during wartime.

I found these at the amazing database of old ads that Gwen posted about. Thanks again for the link Martin W.!

Every time I see the cover of Parenting Magazine I’m surprised by the tagline:

“What matters to moms”

Here is the cover of the most recent issue. Where are dads? What sort of parenting do they do?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaPcBwmCtiM[/youtube]

Sexism in commercials is sadly just so, well, typical. But every once in a while a commercial comes along that goes above and beyond, like this one from Hungry Man. Take note of the ending where the Hungry Man meal crushes the feminized fruit drinks.

This commercial has multiple layers of sexism. One is obviously gendering food choices. Why are healthy foods (fruit and yogurt) feminized and unhealthy meat and potatoes in large quantities (sans green vegetables) associated with masculinity and being tough? And what kind of prescriptions about class and work are made as well? Why are these blue collar “working men” when drinking fruit shakes and health drinks are typically associated with white collar, upper class women (and men)?

As the commercial says… you are what you eat.

I wonder why a recent study found that “the gender divide starts over dinner.”

While we’re on the topic of the current presidential campaign…

I’ve noticed something interesting about the images and phrases used to criticize Clinton and Obama. Why does the majority of anti-Clinton rhetoric use sexist images and language? And how prevelant is the (expected?) matching racism in the anti-Obama rhetoric and images? Why, instead, does Obama’s national allegiance and patriotism come into question? I think this would make for a great class discussion on intersectionality, an what prejudices are perceived to be “socially acceptable.”

Some possible questions for discussion:

• Is it more socially acceptable to be overtly sexist than overtly racist? Why?
• Why might it seem to be more okay to question someone’s patriotism/nationalism than to be overtly racist? What is the difference?
• What is really racist that doesn’t immediately appear racist?

And the images– again these come from Facebook groups with tens of thousands of members. See also previous images of Hillary Clinton here and here.

“I found my voice”:

“Stop mad cow”:

“Fly, my pretties, fly!  Bring me the presidency”:

And now for Obama…

And here are some attacking Barack Obama’s nationality and patriotism:

And the infamous image (more info from snopes.com):

When I was in grade school, I remember having one of my first sociological “aha moments” during geography. We were starting a unit on Latin and South American countries and each of us had to draw a map showing the countries and capitals to show how much we already knew. We all had those school issued atlases of the world, but we had to draw the map of Latin and South America without using the atlas.

What I ended up with was similar to most kids at my table– a huge United States with a skinny little piece of land under it, just barely larger than Florida and then a larger piece of land under that about the size of Alaska. As elementary school kids in Maine we obviously knew very little about anything south of say, Washington D.C. and this was reflected in the little pieces of land we drew. I opened up my atlas and looked at how large Latin and South America really were and was shocked. It was nearly as large as Africa, and certainly larger than the the U.S.

How things are measured makes all the difference and cartography (map making) has a fascinating history in colonial empires and imperialism (charting “unknown” far off lands filled with “savages” etc.). So when SWS member Jeanne Flavin sent me a link to the ODT Maps website I had to share some of them here.

Let’s start with a pretty “typical” North America-centered map of the world–

Now how about this equal area ODT map?

© www.ODTmaps.com

And how about an actual equal area Pacific-centered map from ODT?

© www.ODTmaps.com

And how about this South-up map, challenging North-South perceptions (how do we know which end of the world is “up” anyway– who decides that?).

© www.ODTmaps.com

And my favorite– the population map.

© www.ODTmaps.com

There are more maps and resources for the classroom on the ODT website. Thanks Jeanne!

From an article in the UK TimesOnline via an article on a bed for little girls called “Lolita.”

Yes, all these t-shirts come in children’s and baby sizes…

aa bb sent us two more images of t-shirts on sale at Target that get at the idea of little girls as spoiled future divas.

“Born to be spoiled.”

“Someday I’ll demand a pony.”

NEW! Natalie K. sent in some more examples of kids’ t-shirts with sexual messages, these from the clothing company Cotton on Kids (she believes it’s an Australian company).

(Found at the Herald Sun.)

(From news.com.au)

Despite all kinds of “truces” and “promises” in the media lately about “leaving race and gender out” of the democratic primaries, gender and race are obviously a part of this presidential election cycle.

But, here’s a newsflash: even when the candidates are all white men, gender and race are STILL a part of the decisions made about who should be president.

Think back to 2004 for a moment– remember all those political cartoons criticizing Kerry for being too “French” (as opposed to American Cowboy) and generally feminizing his image (feminine = bad for politics) in political cartoons.

I’m fascinated by the anti-Hillary Clinton facebook groups. There are dozens of these groups, but four groups have the most members.

• Stop Running for President and Make Me a Sandwich– 30,000+ members
• Anti Hillary Clinton for President ’08– 65,000+ members
• Stop Hillary Clinton: One Million Strong AGAINST Hillary– 700,000+ members
• Life’s a Bitch, Why Vote for One?– 14,000+ members

So this morning I spent some time looking at the images that dominate these groups. The images these groups use to criticize Clinton as a presidential candidate make it pretty clear that sexism is alive and well (beyond the protesters asking Clinton to iron their shirts)– and that gendered ways to talk about politics are as cogent as ever! Here’s a smattering for you– there are so many I couldn’t possibly post them all!

And the intersection of race and gender…