Jump to content
Squid Division

Unnecessary Comical Picture Thread

Recommended Posts

True. But what comes first: Does the advert appeal to nature, or have people been programmed to respond to roles? Interesting discussion.

(As a boy, I can say that the male keywords tapped/tap into a part of me... but I couldn't say if that would still be true if I'd grown up in a world with different ideas of what a "man" was.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You may be interested to know that the old Leisure Suit Larry games did something similar to verify the player's age: http://www.allowe.com/Larry/1questions.htm

Yeah, those worked. I could never get past those (a lot of them I still can't).

Yes, it was very clever, but...

Johnny Carson is

a. a singer.

b. David Letterman's sidekick.

c. Ed McMahon's sidekick.

d. an actor.

Correct answer: c.

Johnny Carson was not Ed McMahon's sidekick!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For most parts the differences between the two word clouds are depressively unsurprising, though there are some interesting details like a complete lack of "fun" in the boys' list. At least "nice" is still there, even if it's only barely readable and just above "evil".

But we know what it is all about:

battle

power

special-forces

friends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My cynical, Noam-Chomsky-filled mind is somewhat blown by that fact that "special-forces" figures in at all. I know that the military industrial complex has been helping market toys and movies for a while now (where was it that I read this recently... I can't seem to remember... Oh, I think it was in the context of David Sirota's new book) but I thought it was more subliminal than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To respond to roles, if you believe the Baby X study and Baby X revisited.

Totally with you. Kids will play with whatever they play with. They're too new to the world to give a shit about gender roles. The rest is just marketing to societal sexist stereotypes. The trouble I have is, when thinking about 10-ish years down the line when I hope to be a father, how to keep my own children from being sucked into that crap. Easy enough at home, but as soon as they have peers it gets weird. It's a huge bummer that that's even an issue, but here we are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was young I carried a huge plastic baby doll all over the house that I named and fed. I also played with my sister's barbies, as well as 'my' toys. I think if you don't make a big deal out of it as a parent, there's little harm done.

If you're looking for really gender-neutral toys, go for Playmobil/Duplo/Lego. Sure it has lines geared more towards boys or girls, but as far as toys go Lego is pretty much the best.

Also; fucking Noam Chomsky, exposing the ugliest sides of our world, grmbl, grmbl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was only this century that the colours were reversed. I.e. Pink was for boys and sky blue for girls. Reason being, pink is related to red, a 'strong' colour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see some validity to this—though this is the first time I hear this theory verbalized—Virgin Mary's color throughout history has been blue. I don't know how culturally universal this is or was in the West, let alone elsewhere, tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's little about genderspecific nonsense that I do not hate with a passion. BS like specific colors being 'male' or 'female', or dress codes like skirts being for girls and pants for men, or in the hobby sphere: sports and home improvement for men, flower arrangement and knitting for women.

It's all arbritrary bullshit, patterns that emerge culturally yet have no inherent value or meaning. Yet it does push people into not being 'able' to do things they might really like. Of course, in today's society where everyone's a freak it's more OK than it used to be to step outside of the boundaries of your gender, but damn if there isn't still a medieval mindset in most people about this stuff.

A simple thing like me having a pattern of cool looking silver flowers on my week planner is enough for people to go deeeuuhhhh? :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can see some validity to this—though this is the first time I hear this theory verbalized—Virgin Mary's color throughout history has been blue. I don't know how culturally universal this is or was in the West, let alone elsewhere, tho.

This wasn't a cultural thing, ultramarine was the most expensive dye and so was associated with royalty. When we managed to make ultramarine paint artificially (and cheaply) it lost its special standing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a pattern of cool looking silver flowers on my week planner

That's so gay!

I know what you mean, though. I think, for example, that it has been shown (heard this from a friend, so I can't provide the article or indeed check whether I got it right) that the apparent gap in math skills between the genders is mostly (if not solely?) due to the mindset that is planted on the kids very early on: "Girls are worse at math, but better at languages."

When I was in elementary school, they had already moved towards "People often say that girls are worse at math, but better at languages. Well, I don't know about that" or "People used to think that girls are worse at math, but better at languages". Nevertheless, the notion was still there and both the boys and the girls got a very good idea what was expected of them: Don't worry if math/languages seem hard, it's because of that thing you have down there, you know.

The effects are painfully clear when comparing the gender distributions between the two schools me and my friend go to (Schools of Technology and of Educational Sciences, respectively). Of course there may be other things at play apart from the constant force-feeding of gender stereotypes. Still, it's probably safe to say it has some role in it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha! I spotted this years ago, I didn't realise it had a "name". The way I see it is this: We're constantly bombarded with information, we just ignore the stuff we don't understand/recognize. Once we understand/recognize it we suddenly stop ignoring it. (Which I see this article subscribes too.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×