The Centers for Disease Control report that pregnancy rates for U.S. girls age 15-19 vary quite significantly by state: from 66/1,000 in Mississippi to 20/1,000 in New Hampshire (dark and light green represent states with teen pregnancy rates lower than the U.S. average; dark and light purple represent states in which it is higher):

The map shows that, on average, southern states tend to have higher teen pregnancy rates than others.

The Centers for Disease Control reports that the disparity can be explained, in part, by the fact that Blacks and Latinos tend to have higher rates of teen pregnancy than other racial groups such that states with higher proportions of Blacks and Latinos would have higher rates.  However, rates among different racial/ethnic populations also vary quite tremendously by state.  Among white teenagers the teen pregnancy rate ranged from 4/1,000 (in the District of Columbia) to 55/1,000 (in Mississippi), among Black teenagers, it ranged from 17/1,000 (in Hawaii) to 95/1,000 (in Wisconsin), and among Latinas it ranged from 31/1,000 (in Maine) to 188/1,000 (in Alabama).

Race, then, doesn’t predict differences in rates of teen pregnancy all by itself.  In fact, White teenagers are more likely to get pregnant in some states than Black and Latina teenagers in others.  There must be something region- or state-specific driving teen pregnancy rates.

The CDC doesn’t mention sex education, but Mike Lillis at The Hill compared teen pregnancy rates to a sex education policy report by the Guttmacher Institute.  He writes:

All five states with the highest teen birth rates have adopted policies requiring that abstinence be stressed when taught as part of sex education, HIV education or both, the group found. Only one of the five states (New Mexico) mandates that sex education be a part of students’ curriculum.

Of the four states with the lowest teen birth rates, none requires that abstinence be stressed to students, according to Guttmacher.

For your perusal, the CDC data, by state and race (# of pregnancies/1,000 girls 15-19):

Hat tip to Annie Shields at Ms. magazine.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

Elizabeth McM. sent in this Life magazine ad from 1936 in which Camel cigarettes are argued to facilitate digestion.  Accordingly, you should smoke at least one between every course!  The ad (text below):

I am hard pressed to imagine that such an ad would fly today.  That these ads would not only be un-palatable, but impermissible, is evidence that the power of corporations is not absolute.

Text:

Thanksgiving Dinner… and then the peaceful feeling that comes from good digestion and smoking Camels!

OFF TO A GOOD START — with hot spiced tomato soup.  And then–for digestion’s sake–smoke a Camel right after the soup.

THE MAIN EVENT — The time-honoured turkey of our forefathers–done to a crisp and golden brown–and flanked by a mountain of ruby cranberry jelly.  By all means enjoy a second helping.  But before you do–smoke another Camel.  Camels ease tension.  Speed up the flow of digestive fluids.  Increase alkalinity.  Help your digestion to run smoothly.

DOUBLE PAUSE — First–for the crisp refreshment of a Waldorf Salad–then–once again, for the sheer pleasure of Camel’s costlier tobaccos.  This double pause clears the palate–and sets the stage for desert.

WHAT WILL YOU HAVE FOR DESSERT? Reading in a circle, there’s luscious Pumpkin Pie… Mince Pie a la mode… layer cake with inch-deep icing… a piping-hot Plum Pudding… and Camels to add the final touch of comfort and good cheer.  For when digestion proceeds smoothly,  you experience a sense of ease and well-being.

SO TO A HAPPY ENDING — over coffee and your after-dinner Camels.  Enjoy Camels–every mealtime–between courses and after eating–and you can lean back in your chair feeling on top of the world.

FOOD EDITOR — Miss Dorothy Malone says: “It’s smart to have Camels on the table.  My own personal experience is that smoking Camels with my meals and afterwards builds up a sense of digestive well-being.”

“THE BEST MEAL I ever ate would be a disappointment if I coldn’t enjoy Camels,” says William H. Ferguson, salesman. “I smoke Camels as an aid to digestion.  There’s nothing like Camel’s to set you right.”

Good food and good tobacco go together naturally!

Right down the line–from explorers living on “iron rations” to the millions of men and women who’ll heartily enjoy a big Thanksgiving dinner–it is agreed that Camels set you right!  You enjoy more food more and have a feeling of greater ease after eating when you smoke Camels between courses and after meals.

Enjoy Camels all you wish–all through the day.  Camel’s costlier tobaccos as supremely mild.  Steady smokers say that Camel’s never tire the taste or get on the nerves.  And when you’re tired, try this: get a “lift” with a Camel!

COSTLIER TOBACCOS

Camels are made from finer, MORE EXPENSIVE TOBACCOS . . . Turkish and Domestic . . . than any other popular brand.

FOR DIGESTION’S SAKE — SMOKE CAMELS

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

Black women and Latinas are more likely to die from breast cancer than white women.  This is, in part, because white women are more likely to have health insurance.  New research, however, illustrated by Philip Cohen at Family Inequality, suggests that even we control for types of insurance and whether women are insured, black women and especially Latinas wait longer than white women for a diagnosis of cancer after the discovery of a breast abnormality:

The authors of the study, Heather Hoffman and colleagues, did not attempt to explain the cause of the disparity.

See also our posts on racial disparities in life expectancy for people with Down’s Syndrome, rates of asthma, and kidney failure.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

Dmitriy T.M. sent in a post by Irin Carmon at Jezebel about Playboy memorabilia up for auction, including images of centerfolds with editorial comments for the Photoshopper to fix various problematic aspects of the photos. The marked-up images gives us a peek into the process of creating a centerfold, as well as the scrutiny applied to literally every aspect of the models’ bodies, which are found wanting in a dizzying array of ways, with their blatant imperfections resulting from being actual living humans.

This one includes instructions to fix her large pores and soften her laugh lines (see the top left):

The rest of these images are *definitely* Not  Safe for Work, so beware:

more...

Amanda S. sent in a great example of the assumption that only women care for children, this one from a government agency. The photograph is of a section of the California Department of Motor Vehicles Driver’s Manual. It specifies that one might want to give a little bit of extra street-crossing time to older people, disabled people, and “women with young children” (apparently dads are never in public with their children… or else they hurry those slowpokes right along):

What I like about this example, in particular, is that it shows that gendered assumptions about parenting (mostly the assumption that women do it) isn’t just something that advertisers and other cultural producers do, it is also reflected in official government business. And, while this mistake doesn’t have any concrete consequences, if it is easy for this sort of thing to go unnoticed in this context, you could imagine it going unnoticed in materials that do, in fact, affect public policy.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

Anita Sarkeesian, at Feminist Frequency, starts from the beginning.  How is contemporary advertising to children gendered today?  And why does it matter?  With a special discussion of girls and technology.  Enjoy:

(Transcript after the jump.)

more...

In 2010, as a matter of free speech, the United States Supreme Court decided that there can be no limits on corporate spending on advertisements in favor of a political candidate (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission).  Open Secrets produced two figures revealing the rise in “outside spending” (i.e., non-party spending) showing the rise.

Total outside spending:

Outside spending for liberals and conservatives:

Open Secrets explains:

…the 2004 election marked a watershed moment in the use of independent expenditures to try to sway voters, with most of that new spending coming from the national party committees.  The 2010 election marks the rise of a new political committee, dubbed “super PACs,” and officially known as “independent-expenditure only committees,” which can raise unlimited sums from corporations, unions and other groups, as well as wealthy individuals.

Hermes’ Journeys editorializes:

You can see that liberals slightly outspent conservatives every election since 1996. Except for this year, when quite suddenly a mysterious flood of funding caused conservative campaign coffers to skyrocket, DOUBLING what liberals could muster. Was this the result of concerned right-leaning citizens becoming active in politics and making individual donations?  Of course not, it was profit-minded corporations…

…enabled, if I may finished HJ’s sentence, by the recent court decision.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

A couple of weeks ago I posted a vintage ad referring to Bolsheviks and an interesting discussion ensued about the difficulty of knowing how seriously people would have taken ads at the time they were made and whether the ad would have been seen as a parody at the time. We have a tendency to see ourselves as particularly witty, sophisticated consumers of media and to think people in the past were more straight-forward, credulous, and took things at face value (I’ve certainly been guilty of it), as though sarcasm and parody are recent inventions.

I thought of that when I saw the video Michael M. sent in. It was made as an in-house joke by a producer of commercials in the 1960s and makes fun of cliches used in commercials at the time. It’s slightly NSFW–there are exposed breasts at about 4:10 in, as a reader pointed out.

It also, of course, pulls the curtain back on the advertising industry a bit. As Michael says,

We’ve all seen parodies of the old 50s and 60s style commercials, but I thought it very interesting (and telling) to see it parodied at the time of production, in knowing fashion by the very people who make them. These advertisers were well aware they were selling a fantasy.

Gwen Sharp is an associate professor of sociology at Nevada State College. You can follow her on Twitter at @gwensharpnv.