Search results for disney

SocImages’ Pinterest Pages

Lisa Wade, PhD on May 16, 2013

SocImages maintains an active Pinterest Account featuring over 25 boards.  The site allows you to browse through over 12,000 images and videos without any text.  You can borrow the material directly, or click through to the blog to read the analysis.

On this page, we direct your attention to our boards featuring social construction as well as those with content related to media and marketing, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, violence, economics, and other fun stuff.
x
Social Construction

25Social Construction
x
x
x
x
x
Sexual Orientation
x
2Before Homosexuality
x
x
x
x
16Heteronormativity
x
x
x
x
x
Race and Ethnicity
x
5What Color is Flesh?
x
x
x
x
10Racial Objectification
x
x
x
x
x
15Race as a Social Construction
x
x
x
x
1aRacist Antics at High Schools and Colleges
x
x
x
x
x
Gender
x
9Gendered Housework and Parenting
x
x
x
x
x
12The Tyranny of Pink and Blue
x
x
x
x
x
17Gendered and Sexualized Food
x
x
x
x
x
20Pointlessly Gendered Products
x
x
x
x
x
23Women vs. People
x
x
x
x
x
Screenshot_1The Mean Girls Meme
x
x
x
x
x
Violence
x
21Violence in Fashion (Trigger Warning)
x
x
x
x
x
24Rape Culture (Trigger Warning)
x
x
x
x
x
Media and Marketing
x
6Photoshop and Re-Touching
x
x
x
x
x
7 Sexually-Suggestive Advertising
x
x
x
x
x
3Sexy Toy and Logo Make-Overs
x
x
x
x
x
PinterestMarketing Feminism
x
x
x
x
8 Deconstructing Disney
x
x
x
x
1Mostly Misguided Safer Sex PSAs
x
x
x
x
13Masculinizing the Feminine
x
x
x
x
1 (3)Pinkwashing
x
x
x
x
1 (4)Sexy What!?
x
x
x
x
19Feminizing the Masculine




x
Economics
x
18The Great Recession
x
x
x
x
x
Just for Fun
x
4Vintage Ads, Products, and Stuff
x
x
x
x
11Comics and Cartoons
x
x
x
x
22Halloween
x
x
x
x
14The Social Construction of Flavor

From Our Archives: Women’s History Month

Lisa Wade, PhD on March 31, 2013

To mark the end of Women’s History Month, we offer this compilation of our posts on women and history.

Sports:3

Health:1

Fashion and Norms of Attractiveness:4

Work:5

Education:

Marriage and Motherhood:6

Suffrage:

Marketing:
2

Children and Toys:1

War and Military:

Activism:

Color, Sound,and Language:

Just for Fun:

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.

Course Guide for History of Women

Lisa Wade, PhD on March 21, 2013

Course Guide for
HISTORY OF WOMEN
(last updated 03/2013)

Developed by Lisa Wade, PhD
Occidental College

 

Sports:

Health:

Fashion and Norms of Attractiveness:

Work:

Education:

Marriage and Motherhood:

Suffrage:

Marketing:

Children and Toys:

War and Military:

Activism:

Color, Sound,and Language:

Just for Fun:

Women in Hollywood: Underrepresented On the Screen and Behind the Scenes

Gwen Sharp, PhD on March 20, 2013

The Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media has released several research reports detailing gender inequalities in Hollywood, both in front of and behind the camera.

To get a sense of how men and women are portrayed on the large and small screen, researchers analyzed 11,927 speaking parts from three sources: 129 top-grossing family films (rated PG-13 or lower) released from 2006 to 2011, 275 prime-time programs from 2012 (from 10 broadcast and cable channels), and 36 kids’ programs that aired on PBS, Nickelodeon, or Disney in 2011. The analysis indicated that women are underrepresented as characters in speaking roles, as well as narrators:

gender characters

However, gender differences in representation aren’t just about who is on the screen; it matters how they’re depicted, too. Female characters in the sample were more likely to be sexualized, including factors such as sexy clothing, exposed skin, and having their attractiveness specifically referenced by another character:

sexiness

Men and women were also depicted differently in the workplace. In the sample, few female characters were presented in high-level positions within their occupations:

jobs

What about behind the scenes? Researchers associated with the institute looked at the gender breakdown of those employed in behind-the-scenes jobs (writers, directors, producers, etc.) in Hollywood as well. Unsurprisingly, the results indicate that women remain significantly underrepresented in these positions.

According to their analysis of the 250 highest-grossing films in the U.S. in 2012, women held just 18% of these positions. In fact, women’s representation in these behind-the-scenes roles has been basically stagnant for over a decade:

pic1

There’s significant variation behind the scenes as well. Women made up a quarter of producers and one in five editors, but only 9% of directors and 2% of cinematographers:

pic2

Women hold a larger proportion of behind-the-scenes roles in broadcast television than in the film industry. Looking at a randomly-selected episode of every drama, comedy, or reality show that aired during prime time in the 2011-2012 season, 26% of these roles went to women:

pic3

Again we see wide variation in the different behind-the-scenes jobs. Women are much more likely to be producers than directors in the sampled episodes, and only 4% of directors of photography were women. And while the percent of female creators and writers for prime time TV shows jumped in 2011-2012, less than a third of either position was held by women:

pic4

For more on representations in Hollywood, see our earlier posts on race and gender in films and Anita Sarkeesian applying the Bechdel test to the 2012 Oscar Best Picture nominees.

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

Hands and the Gender Binary: Gnomeo & Juliet Edition

Philip Cohen on January 30, 2013

Cross-posted at Family Inequality.

I previously complained about Tangled‘s 75%-male cast and extreme sex dimorphism — the habit of exaggerating average differences between men and women — in the romantic leads, as seen in this hand shot:

Keeping to my policy of two-year delays in movie reviews, let me add the same complaint about Gnomeo and Juliet, the charming adaptation from Disney’s Touchstone imprint. Here, a writing team of 8 men and 2 women (including Shakespeare) gives us a named cast of 14 men and 7 women, in a love story featuring these two adorable garden gnomes:

He’s only a little taller, and (judging by the gray beard) a little older. And in the movie she demonstrates bravery and feats of strength, as is now the norm. But look at those hands! Take a closer look:

What is it about hands that makes it so essential for men and women to have such differences?

In the “man hands” episode of Seinfeld we learned how distressing it can be for a man to find out the woman to whom he was attracted has large hands.

That scene required a hand double. In real life, men’s and women’s hands differ on average but with a lot of overlap in the distributions — lots of men have hands smaller than lots of women. But in animation the gloves are off — and Disney is free to pair up couples who are many standard deviations apart in hand size.

Philip N. Cohen is a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland, College Park, and writes the blog Family Inequality. You can follow him on Twitter or Facebook.

The Growth Of Monopoly Power

Marty Hart-Landsberg, PhD on November 13, 2012

Cross-posted at Reports from the Economic Front.

Market advocates have had their way for years now and one of the consequences has been the growing dominance of industry after industry by a select few powerful corporations.  In short, unchecked competition can and does produce its opposite: monopoly.

As John Bellamy Foster, Robert W. McChesney, and R. Jamil Jonna explain:

This [development] is anything but an academic concern. The economic defense of capitalism is premised on the ubiquity of competitive markets, providing for the rational allocation of scarce resources and justifying the existing distribution of incomes. The political defense of capitalism is that economic power is diffuse and cannot be aggregated in such a manner as to have undue influence over the democratic state. Both of these core claims for capitalism are demolished if monopoly, rather than competition, is the rule.

The chart below highlights the rise, especially since the 1980s, in both the number and percentage of U.S. manufacturing industries in which four firms account for more than 50% of sales.

Number and Percentage of U.S. Manufacturing Industries in which Largest Four Companies Accounted for at Least 50 Percent of Shipment Value in Their Industries, 1947-2007:

As the table below shows, the concentration of market power is not confined to manufacturing.

Percentage of Sales for Four Largest Firms in Selected U.S. Retail Industries:

Industry (NAICS code)  1992    1997    2002    2007
Food & beverage stores (445)  15.4    18.3    28.2    27.7
Health & personal care stores (446)  24.7    39.1    45.7    54.4
General merchandise stores (452)  47.3    55.9    65.6    73.2
Supermarkets (44511)  18.0    20.8    32.5    32.0
Book stores (451211)  41.3    54.1    65.6    71.0
Computer & software stores (443120)  26.2    34.9    52.5    73.1

As impressive as these concentration trends may be, they actually understate the market power exercised by leading U.S. firms because many of these firms are conglomerates and active in more than one industry.  The next chart provides some flavor for overall concentration trends by showing the growing share of total business revenue captured by the top two hundred U.S. corporations.  Notice the sharp rise since the 1990s.

Revenue of Top 200 U.S. Corporations as Percentage of Total Business Revenue, U.S. Economy, 1950–2008:

These are general trends.  Here, thanks to Zocalo (which draws on the work of Barry Lynn), we get a picture of the market dominance of just one corporation–Procter and Gamble.  This corporation controls:

  • More than 75 percent of men’s razors
  • About 60 percent of laundry detergent
  • Nearly 60 percent of dishwasher detergent
  • More than 50 percent of feminine pads
  • About 50 percent of toothbrushes
  • Nearly 50 percent of batteries
  • Nearly 45 percent of paper towels, just through the Bounty brand
  • Nearly 40 percent of toothpaste
  • Nearly 40 percent of over-the-counter heartburn medicines
  • Nearly 40 percent of diapers.
  • About 33 percent of shampoo, coffee, and toilet paper

A recent Huffington Post blog post, which includes the following infographic from the French blog Convergence Alimentaire, makes clear that Procter and Gamble, as big as it is, is just one member of a small but powerful group of multinationals that dominate many consumer markets.   The blog post states: “A ginormous number of brands are controlled by just 10 multinationals… Now we can see just how many products are owned by Kraft, Coca-Cola, General Mills, Kellogg’s, Mars, Unilever, Johnson & Johnson, P&G and Nestlé. ”   See here for a bigger version of the infographic.

And, it is not just the consumer goods industry that’s highly concentrated.  As the Huffington Post also noted: “Ninety percent of the media is now controlled by just six companies, down from 50 in 1983…. Likewise, 37 banks merged to become JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and CitiGroup in a little over two decades, as seen in this 2010 graphic from Mother Jones.”

Not surprisingly, there are complex interactions and struggles between these dominant companies.  Unfortunately, most end up strengthening monopoly power at the public expense.  For example, as Zocalo reports, Wal-Mart, Target, and other major retailers have adopted a new control strategy in which:

…these retailers name a single supplier to serve as a category captain. This supplier is expected to manage all the shelving and marketing decisions for an entire family of products, such as dental care.

The retailer then requires all the other producers of this class of products — these days, usually no more than one or two other firms — to cooperate with the captain. The consciously intended result of this tight cartelization is a growing specialization of production and pricing among the few big suppliers who are still in business…

It’s not that Wal-Mart and category copycats like Target cede all control over shelving and hence production decisions to these captains. The trading firms use the process mainly to gain more insight into the operations of the manufacturers and hence more leverage over them, their suppliers, and even their other clients… Wal-Mart, for instance, has told Coca-Cola what artificial sweetener to use in a diet soda, it has told Disney what scenes to cut from a DVD, it has told Levi’s what grade of cotton to use in its jeans, and it has told lawn mower makers what grade of steel to buy.

And don’t think that such consolidation within the Wal-Mart system makes it easier for new small manufacturers and retailers to rise up and compete. The exact opposite tends to be true. . . . This [system] boils down to presenting the owners of midsized and smaller companies, like Oakley or Tom’s of Maine, with the “option” of selling their business to the monopolist in exchange for a “reasonable” sum determined by the monopolist.

This was the message delivered to many of the companies that in recent decades managed to develop big businesses seemingly outside the reach of the Procter & Gambles, Krafts, and Gillettes of the world. Consider the following:

  • Ben & Jerry’s, the Vermont ice cream company that reshaped the industry, was swallowed by Unilever in 2000.
  • Cascadian Farm, one of the most successful organic food companies, sold out to General Mills and was promptly transformed into what its founder calls a “PR farm.”
  • Stonyfield Farm and Brown Cow, organic dairy companies from New Hampshire and California, respectively, separately sold con-trol to the French food giant Groupe Danone in February 2003 and were blended into a single operation.
  • Glaceau, the company behind the brightly colored Vitamin Water and one of the last independent success stories, sold out to Coca-Cola in 2007.

The practical result is a hierarchy of power in which a few immense trading companies — in control of and to some degree in cahoots with a few dominant supply conglomerates — govern almost all the industrial activities on which we depend, and they back their efforts with what amounts to police power. This tiny confederation of private corporate governments determines who wins and who loses in this country, at least within our consumer economy.

Of course the growing concentration nationally is matched by a growing concentration of power globally, with large transnational corporations from different nations battling each other and, in many cases, uniting through mergers and acquisitions.  We cannot hope to understand and overcome our current problems and the structural pressures limiting our responses to them without first acknowledging the extent of corporate dominance over our economic lives.

—————————

Martin Hart-Landsberg is a professor of Economics and Director of the Political Economy Program at Lewis and Clark College.  You can follow him at Reports from the Economic Front.

This Month in Sociological Images (August 2012)

SocImages on August 31, 2012

Tip: This may look like a boring update post, but you really, really, really want to scroll down to the bottom.

SocImages News

Resources for Instructors (and Other Curious Types)

If you haven’t yet, please visit our For Instructors page.  Here are some highlights:

Course Guides

As you begin the Fall semester, don’t forget about our amazing Course Guides!  These organize SocImages posts in a way that follows standard syllabi for frequently-taught sociology courses.  We currently feature the following:

For those of you that already use them.  Thank you so much!  Our guides have been visited, collectively, 43,000 times.  We’re thrilled.

Have a Guide you might like to put together?  We’re looking for volunteers — sociology professors or graduate students — who are willing to browse our archives, pull out the most compelling posts, and arrange them in ways other instructors would find familiar and convenient.  The Guides can cover entire courses or be designed to help illustrate a theory, article, or book.  (We’re even happy to have duplicate Guides, since every instructor is different.)  Send us an email at socimages@thesocietypages.org.

Pinterest Pages

Our Pinterest pages are fun for everyone, but they’re useful for professors looking for just the right image to illustrate an idea.  We currently have one page with all SocImages material (over 9,000 pins!) and 17 pages on specific topics.  Please feel free to browse!

Upcoming Lectures and Appearances:

Lisa has started booking talks and lectures for the fall.  Her first talk will be at Indiana State University (Sept. 17th-19th) where she’ll be giving a featured lecture at the International Crime, Media & Popular Culture Studies Conference.

Social Media ‘n’ Stuff:

Finally, this is your monthly reminder that SocImages is on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, and Pinterest.  Lisa is on Facebook and most of the team is on Twitter: @lisadwade, @gwensharpnv, @familyunequal, @carolineheldman, @jaylivingston, and @wendyphd.

In Other News…

We totally went to an aerobics class taught by Richard Simmons! It was every bit as wacky and amazing as you would think it would be. He even took a  photo with us. If you’re in L.A., you can take a class with him for only $12, and we highly recommend it. Here we are with Richard in all our post-workout glory:

Just for Fun on Sunday: Found in Translation

Lisa Wade, PhD on August 26, 2012

Somehow the accidental mis-translation of the Princess/Barbie character is just right…

Buzzfeed and CookdandBombd, via Work that Matters.

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.

  • About Sociological Images

    Sociological Images encourages people to exercise and develop their sociological imaginations with discussions of compelling visuals that span the breadth of sociological inquiry. Read more…

  • Posts by Topic

  • Archives

  • Subscribe

  • Subscribe by Email