Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Sexpot Virgins: The Media's Sexualization of Young Girls

By Tana Ganeva, AlterNet. Posted May 24, 2008.


Professor M. Gigi Durham discusses the corporate media's sexual objectification of girls and how to help young women fight regressive media messages.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Tana Ganeva

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

In 2006, the retail chain Tesco launched the Peekaboo Pole Dancing Kit, a play set designed to help young girls "unleash the sex kitten inside."

Perturbed parents, voicing concern that their 5-year-olds might be too young to engage in sex work, lobbied to have the product pulled. Tesco removed the play set from the toy section but kept it on the market.

As M. Gigi Durham points out in The Lolita Effect: The Media Sexualization of Young Girls and What We Can Do About It, Tesco's attempt to sell stripper gear to kids is just one instance of the sexual objectification of young girls in the media and marketplace. Some of the many other examples include a push-up bra for preteens, thongs for 10-year-olds bearing slogans like "eye candy," and underwear geared toward teens with "Who needs credit cards ... ?" written across the crotch.

Targeted by marketers at increasingly younger ages, girls are now being exposed to the kind of unhealthy messages about sexuality that have long dogged grown women. Girls are told that their worth hinges on being "hot," which in mainstream media parlance translates into thin, white, makeupped and scantily clad. Meanwhile, acting on their sexual impulses earns them the epithet "slut." Teen magazines advise girls on how to tailor their look and personality to please boys (in order to entrap them in relationships). Advertisements present violence toward women as sexy.

According to Durham, the regressive messages about sexuality that circulate in mainstream media hamper the healthy sexual development of kids and teens.

Durham's critique does not end with the corporate media. She also faults adults for failing to engage in reasonable, open dialogue with teens about sex -- thus leaving the sexual education of young people to a media primarily concerned with generating profit, as opposed to, say, selflessly helping young people develop healthy ideas about sexuality.

AlterNet talked to Durham on the phone about the sexual objectification of girls in the media and how to help them challenge regressive messages about their sexuality.

What's the "Lolita Effect," and why is it harmful?

The Lolita Effect is the media's sexual objectification of young girls. In the Nabokov novel the protagonist, who is 12 years old at the start of the book, is the object of desire for Humbert Humbert the pedophile. In the book you're put into the mind of the predator; Lolita, in Humbert's view, initiates the sex and is very knowledgeable and all that. Nowadays the term Lolita has come to mean a little girl who is inappropriately sexual, wanton, and who sort of flaunts her sexuality and seduces older men. I'm very critical of that construction in the novel and in real life because little girls can't be held responsible in this way. They're not born with the understanding or intention of seducing older men, and the burden of responsibility can't be placed on children. They're just too young to knowingly enter into these kinds of relationships. The Lolita Effect is the way our culture, and more importantly our corporate media, have constructed these little "Lolitas" by sexualizing them and marketing really sexualized items of clothing and behaviors to them -- constructing them as legitimate sexual actors when they aren't.

In your book you talk about how over the past 50 years female sex symbols have gotten a lot younger. In the 1950s you had people like Elizabeth Taylor and Marilyn Monroe, who reached the peak of their popularity in their mid- to late 20s. Now there are 12-year-old models. What accounts for this shift?

That's interesting, isn't it? Marilyn Monroe was 27 when she starred in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. It's a lot easier for me to accept someone pushing 30 as a sexual being. What accounts for this shift? I can make educated inferences even though of course we have no hard data about what actually caused it. Part of it is that marketers caught on, somewhere in the 1990s, which was a very prosperous time economically in the United States especially, that young kids, tweens and children had a lot of disposable income and were spending a lot of money. Last year the market research firm Euromonitor said that worldwide tween spending reached 170 billion dollars. I think a large part of it was the marketers' realization that they could cultivate cradle-to-grave consumers by targeting very young kids by getting them to buy into the frames that older women have been persuaded to buy into for a long time, such as trying to achieve unattainable bodies and present themselves as highly desirable to men. They could get little girls to start consuming cosmetics and fashion and even diet aides at very young ages and then hold onto them for longer. So I think a lot of it was a marketing impulse.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: consumerism, teens, sex, media, gender, children

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Society’s sexualization of women
Posted by: Lector on May 24, 2008 1:02 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Durham lays some of the blame on parents for their children’s “wanton” and inappropriately sexual behavior. This is absurd. How can adults in America be expected to engage in reasonable, open dialogue with teens about sex in a Christianized society that generally advises to repress sexual pleasures and when the parents have never learned to be been reasonable and open about it themselves? So called Christian America is a sexually repressed society and when you ban something it usually becomes more attractive. Porn is a billion dollar industry in the USA. Add corporate materialism to the brew and you confuse the hell out of young people who are America’s future.

America needs a renewed Enlightenment that will base itself on the proposition that the proper study of mankind is man and woman., instead of the current religious movement, of hell-fire religion which suppresses women and a society’s sexual desires – on the extreme end, look no further than the weird religious cults in America where old men get to bed down with several young things each week.

Although everyone should be read up on the Bible to protect themselves against religious con men, the proper pursuit of knowledge and life should be the study of literature and poetry for the eternal ethical questions with which it deals and unfettered scientific inquiry and its discoveries available to the masses. This will clarify to any young person that Nabokov’s novel was not meant to be emulated but appreciated as a work on the human condition. Most importantly, there should be a divorce between sexual life and fear, and the sexual life and disease, and the sexual life and tyranny. The heavy religious chatter in that goes on in our country is sinister and infantile and unenlightening and I think it contributes to the twisted values on younger people. “To … to develop critical consumers”, as Durham says, in our society, is the key but most of America still believes in the moral commandments of an ancient desert God. You can’t have an honest conversation about media or morals like this.

Pointless

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» THAT didn't take long. Posted by: kenhymes
» Sure didn't. Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: religeous history Posted by: WyrdSister
» more boning.... Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: more boning.... Posted by: WyrdSister
» actually, lots of........ Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: actually, lots of........ Posted by: WyrdSister
My seventeen year old granddaughters
Posted by: bitsfick on May 24, 2008 3:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
must be way above the norm, because they wouldn't buy into that bullshit for a second. Thanks in a large part to me, my daughter is a fiercely independent woman, and she is raising her daughters to be the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you Ms Durham
Posted by: regans on May 24, 2008 3:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was wondering how long it would take someone to address this topic. I'm still scouring the darkest corners of my brain trying to find an even remotely legitimate justification for the Miley Cyrus photo shoot, in a society where sex with people under 18 is supposed to be immoral and illegal. "Critical consumers" is right, at least as long as greed remains the defining characteristic of our culture, and yes, parents are part of the problem. They let their 9 year old daughters walk out of the house dressed like hookers, and then when they hear in the news about an older man abusing an underage girl they want to lynch the guy. Of course there is never an excuse for a grown man to have sexual contact with a child, but why would any responsible parent want to tempt the devil that way. It's just one more example of the rampant perversity and hypocricy that eventually destroys every society that values profits more than people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thank you Ms Durham Posted by: bizeeb
» RE: Thank you Ms Durham Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: Thank you Ms Durham Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: Thank you Ms Durham Posted by: cannibalgod70
Wait, I dont get it, don't you want this?
Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters on May 24, 2008 4:13 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Give it a few days from now and I'll see an article on how kids should be giving birth control/ planed parenthood/ access to abortions and so on. Do you people want kids to be sexual or not? Yes this might be hard for you to do however stop and think very hard about the facts. In this hyper sexual society we are going to go from promoting sex to dismissing the bi-product to "male driving sex objection?"
I always knew the 4th wave of feminism was to try and to the impossible: to lobotomised the male species into a unnatural thinking when you look at a female. Now any self respecting man has standards to "rob the cradle" however if you turn on MTV/BET, pick up a female magazine you will see "girls, girls, girls."
I hate to say it however you can't have it both ways when it comes to sexuality. When you want sex to be open like that School District in Maine handing out birth control to 5th graders and they you wonder why you see images like Miley Cyrus, as she said "in the name of art;" You get what you pay for. Don't dare blame me being a male for the fact that Miley at age 15 or any other 15 year old thinks that would be just appropriate in today's society when "if you an't screwing, your a loser". Sex itself if a major responsibility, thats why at least you should wait until your are a little more responsible. Check yourself next time when you are quick to hand out/promote birth control to your 14 year old daughter or sister, you might want to say "its OK to wait" and "to be yourself and not what you see on TV."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» there is a difference Posted by: hurricane hugo
» I'm in the ball park on this one Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters
» RE: Stop using Michael Graham Posted by: Ydotheyhateus
» I hope you were wasted Posted by: hurricane hugo
» stone cold sober Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: schools are not the problem. Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: schools are not the problem. Posted by: pfeifer999
Tesco toy? I doubt it.
Posted by: Beagle17 on May 24, 2008 4:47 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I agree with the point of this article, the lede is questionable. I agree with the conclusion of this blogger that this sex toy was probably added to the Tesco Website by a disgruntled employee. I think the writer here should look deeper before slamming Tesco. I just can't believe Tesco would legitimately sell such an item as a kids toy. But who knows, I guess. Like I said, I agree with the gist of this article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The toy/game is real... Posted by: hurricane hugo
» RE: The toy/game is real... Posted by: 23skidoo
News Flash - This is Reporting?
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson on May 24, 2008 5:01 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
News flash: Advertisers, the media and Alternet use sexually-charged images of young girls to sell things - look at the pic at the beginning of the article. Men and women respond by buying.

Kiddie briefs and outerwear with the word "pink" written across the ass are intended for people to look at the ass, but make mental allusions to to the "pink" on the other side.

These things may not help foster strong individuality and a sense of personal identity in our young women.

There - I just spared you from reading the article, and improved on it by providing a better example of these things at work.

I also saved you from completely made up assertions to the effect that this is something new, in historical terms. Back in the day we married much younger, and it was perfectly acceptable. Thus, I disagree with the premise that sex symbols used to be older, and this connection between youth and sex is something new.

More news flashes: Young girls are hotter than older women, most other things being equal, and they look better advertising bikinis. Also, it's OK these days to be a "slut." Men love sluts.

This article is a joke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» EWWWWW!!!! Posted by: margwa
» Taking me Way too Seriously Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» YECCCCCCH Posted by: beautifulady2003
» missed the sarcasm Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» Women can Do What they Want Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» Consider this... Posted by: margwa
» bla bla bla - one example Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» sarcasm anyone? Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
Better Qualities
Posted by: beautifulady2003 on May 24, 2008 5:08 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe the problem here is that sexiness and being "hot" are being pushed at the expense of more important human qualities, such as dignity, intelligence and self-respect. Sexualizing children, either with clothing or with overly liberal craptrap that insists 4 year olds are "sexual", is grotesque. Little girls in thong panties, etc., is evidence of a diseased society, so bored with itself that it resorts to making its children into playthings for adults. I work in a school, and every day I see 12 year olds wearing push-up bras, tons of makeup and skin tight jeans. Their parents let them leave the the house looking this way. What is the matter with the parents?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Better Qualities Posted by: tgabriel
» RE: Better Qualities Posted by: pizzmoe
» Liberal as in 'libertine' or 'liberated' Posted by: Democratic Socialist
» RE: Better Qualities Posted by: HoboHomo
Free Sex
Posted by: SBK on May 24, 2008 5:46 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the whole of society could safely express their sexuality in all the ways it appears, whether it be old women in leather or older men with younger boys (of course over 18!), then teenage girls would not have to bear the burden of carrying the whole of society's sexual imagery. The problem is no one else is allowed to be sexual except young pretty girls. We need to come to terms with all forms of sexual expression, no matter who it is. The exaggeration comes from the fact that all that energy gets narrowed into one small interpretation of "sexy." Spread it around and it will take the pressure of our girls and give them a fighting chance at a healthy body image.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Free Sex Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: Free Sex Posted by: WyrdSister
» google much? Posted by: pfeifer999
Don't Forget the Mormons.
Posted by: douglashoyt on May 24, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The modern day FDLS (polygamist Mormons) also objectify young girls.

Indeed, they take the weird Christian doctrines about sexual roles and twist it into absurdity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Don't Forget the Mormons. Posted by: undercover
Prostitots
Posted by: meetmeineleusis on May 24, 2008 6:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
are gross.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hey, dummies, this really ain't about sex
Posted by: sausage on May 24, 2008 6:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What the author describes is merely a symptom, one facet, of a larger disease gripping this nation, namely the Skinner-box control over the American people by what I've started calling the "advertising/marketing-industrial complex."

The word "Media," as used by Professor Durham, is too nubulous; for while all mediums are intended to influence opinion, not all mediums attempt to influence behavior.

"Advertising/marketing," uses the research techniques of sociology and psychology to influence the subconscious behavior of individuals, to arrest a person's conscious development at that of a 16-year-old. Not only is the 9-10-11-12-year old girl influenced to dress and act like a 19-year-old street walker but the mother is likewise reinforced to exhibit similar behavior and dress.

As Professor Durham points out there is an extreme dimorphic message aimed at young boys and men. There is nothing more pathetic than seeing a 40 or 50-something man deck out, from head to toe, in the advertising logos of his favorite NASCAR cookie-cutter driver/hero.

If we are to save our civilization and bastardised culture we must face facts and think the unthinkable: It is time to differentiate between what constitutes free, political speech and commercial, manipulative marketing speech; liberate the former while regulating the latter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maybe I'm just a rebel
Posted by: Ayla87 on May 24, 2008 7:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But in the near 21 years that I've been on this earth, I've never felt pushed into creating a sexualized version of myself, not unitl very recently anyway.

I don't wear makeup, except on special occasions, I don't wear skimpy clothes, push up bras, or thongs. In fact, none of my undies have anything written on either side. I feel most comfortable in a hoody and jeans, or during the summer, either a nice blouse and shorts or a summer dress. All of my bathing suits until this summer have been black one peices.

I care about my wieght and body image, but not to the point of shaping myself into something I'm not. My ideal weight is 150, and size 8 jeans. And yes thats possible, considering I'm 160 right now and a size 10. I have a fairly strict diet (no butter, red meat, pork, or processed foods), but by no means do I starve myself.

And to top it all off, I refuse to spread eagle until I feel I'm in a stable relationship with someone. Thus far, I haven't found one.

You heard it right: I'm a virgin

Dispite all of that, I'm still hit on by guys... quite frequently. Which makes me really critical of the severity of this issue. I mean, how much can our society really be buying into this crap if a girl like me can still get a guy without engaging in this behavior?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Guys aren't the ones behind this Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters
» and HEY..... Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: Maybe I'm just a rebel Posted by: Democratic Socialist
Most of this whorification of young girls
Posted by: arclight7 on May 24, 2008 8:00 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is being pushed by their mothers, who think it's great that their daughters are learning at a young age just how effective exploiting their sexuality can be for manipulating people to give them what they want.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I was scoping it out Posted by: meetmeineleusis
» Because it was in a snobbishly Posted by: meetmeineleusis
» right Posted by: pfeifer999
Dispose of the media
Posted by: peterpiano on May 24, 2008 8:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In this article there are many ideas that point to the monitoring of the media and that parents should teach how to be critical of what you view and consume from these sources. The culture we have now in the post modern era is one of constant exposure to media and it isn't going away. How is it conceivable to stop the the capitalistic market for what consumers absorb from viewing countless advertisements and all forms of media such movies, MTV, and all of the content of the Internet? We can curtail our viewing of the TV and pull the plug on all other forms of entertainment and create an environment that is fool proof. However, that is also not going to happen. Kids already have been exposed to the media and now have text messaging and cell phones along with a private life on the Internet where they can communicate to their hearts content. Being savvy to the media is their normal thing and the they reach school age and through their teens they have already viewed so many hours of what this society would like them to see and hear, that they are full of
ideas that they act on as so called consumers. We expect parents to guide them, when in fact they have done more or less the same and they provide their kids with the instruments or the media and we expect them to use it responsibly or with a critical mind? .When do parents these days actually have a conversation with their kids about anything for that matter?
Who goes out and buys the clothes that their kids wear? Who provides them with credit cards and finances all their deepest wishes that they buy anything they want with endless desire which is supported by economic forces that the media implants in both the parents and the kid?
I think that we are fooling ourselves about the nature of this society and the other forces at play are the moral or ethical tinged with the extremes of religion that some how make things even worse with repression and condemnation of the very thing that got us here in the first place and that is sex. Then of course we can say that all men are predators and they enjoy being aggressive and violent. That is a sweeping global attack of what men are really about since we are seen as gloating patriarchs with dirty minds that would love to romp at any time with a sweet young thing since we have a burning urge in out loins that needs to be relieved. Or the notion that because we are men we always objectify women as sexual objects and since that is true women should be all the more wary of the motivations of the men. So since from what this article says some how brings to the conclusion that men and the media and the market forces all collude to bring young women into this state of sorry affairs. Then what would we propose as a solution to all of this? Either get rid of the media and that includes not reading magazines or books and of course the mainstream electronic media system that brings all these ideas into your living room and they ought to be monitored as we listen and view critically with our kids. I mean this is preposterous and unfeasible. Unless we turn off the TV and the Internet and the cell phones we will some how be free of all this, but that is a delusion since most of the damage has been done and we are not going to go without it I sure of that. What is going to stop your kids from going out in the world and resisting all these forces that they have come in contact with and make intelligent choices despite the indoctrination? Its a little too late to think that we can control everything isn't it?
Peter

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Americans lack collective will to do what's right
Posted by: nfamous on May 24, 2008 8:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Americans are addicted to celebrities. Look at how pervasive American Idol has become. I know people at work that hate me because I don't watch it. It's not just AI but all of these reality shows. Women are basically told you are here to serve men as an attractive piece of meat. They receive no messages about what it means to be a woman in totality. It's no wonder this bi-curious thing is so popular as women search for emotional intimacy men are not equipped to provide any longer.

The women I meet these days are basically men with breasts and ovaries. They are trying so hard to be like men because they think that's what men want, to not be aggravated and henpecked by women being women. That is absurd. It does not make you a great girlfriend or wife just by letting your husband hand with his guys friends sometimes. These narrow definitions of healthy relationships need to stop.

This trend will continue because, frankly, Americans will not stop it. We all serve corporations, including the government, and their pernicious effects on us and society. You can no longer reform a society like ours without violence. Once the economy crashes perhaps something better will emerge. For now we will have to sit and watch as girls prostitute themselves at shopping malls across the country so they can go right back in and buy something that they hope will make them more popular or more of a hottie with guys. We are well on our way to Third World status. I hope I'm dead when it gets here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I love foreign women Posted by: meetmeineleusis
» RE: I love foreign women Posted by: willymack
» RE: I love foreign women Posted by: willymack
» RE: I love foreign women Posted by: meetmeineleusis
» RE: I love foreign women Posted by: bubber
Sexpot photo
Posted by: kingharvest on May 24, 2008 8:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I thought it was real neat how in your email telling us about this story that you used a cute picture of a cute girl in a high school uniform. Who could resist reading such an article, right? Sex sells, even when it is selling an article that decries the notion that sex sells.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sexpot photo Posted by: Dboy
What about the biggest sexual stereotype of all?
Posted by: stellabloo on May 24, 2008 8:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What about the pervasive link between SEX and ALCOHOL which permeates western society?

Alcohol would have to be the #1 date rape drug, for starters. Teenage binge drinking has become a major social concern and with that, comes risk-taking, violent behaviour, and possibly "harder" drugs.
My thought is that if two people want to make love badly enough to do it while SOBER then so be it.
I don't claim to be a puritan myself, but if someone had explained all to me this much earlier I could have saved myself years of grief.
Instead, alcohol and sex were somehow always linked - the repressive nature of social conditioning somehow acceptably obliterated with each drink. Being "adult" meant drinking and with that came the inevitable sexual temptation.
No wonder that booze has been dubbed "panty remover". Women are now brainwashed to mistake true equality with drinking "like a man", but the many health risks of even moderate alcohol consumption are far greater for women.
Yes, the beer pooch and the blotched skin will eventually make those sex kittens quite unattractive but hey - the media/corporate industry have some exciting new products to replace those annoying lifestyle changes!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» yes, but ... Posted by: realmuzik
THIS?
Posted by: xenocyd on May 24, 2008 8:31 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What the hell. I had heard when this pole-business was actually FRESH news that the pole was not intentionally listed in the toys section, it was a mistake that happened and got blown out of proportion. That's what I've always understood, and now I see this article -- what's going on here? It's time to cancel the emails I get from Alternet, because the articles here are honestly starting to just plain suck.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Amusingly enough...
Posted by: blogbooks on May 24, 2008 8:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...there seems to be a direct correlation between the rampant fear and witch hunts over pedophiles and parents allowing their young daughters to walk around in slutty clothes with sexual/teasing messages printed on their non-breasts/ass/etc.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» amen Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: Amusingly enough... Posted by: WyrdSister
Nabokov's Lolita
Posted by: Sushi on May 24, 2008 9:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone who has actually READ Lolita should come away with a creepy insight into the weaving of mental machinations of a pedophile that makes him BELIEVE the little girl is coming on to him, and that HE is the victim of HER seduction. (Although as the story moves along, she does begin to figure out how to manipulate him even though he's got total physical/mental control over her.) That the novel is brilliantly (although uncomfortably) written from the pervert's perspective was a stroke of genius and some of the best writing ever to be put to page. Highly recommended superior literary accomplishment. Makes your skin crawl, but then any good writing, like any good art is SUPPOSED to create an emotional impact!

That being said, I, myself, am a victim of child molestation. At 5 yrs old, I can assure you that I wasn't trying to seduce my bourbon/cigarette-reeking grandfather to feel around in my underwear. And my own father came dangerously close to turning on me on two occasions, once when I was 13. I read somewhere that something like 80% of females have been molested sometime in their lives...typically by someone within the family, not necessarily the "stranger-danger" weirdo down the street. I've known friends who were sexually molested by brothers, friends of brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins and step-fathers. Girls are generally made to feel ashamed and rarely tell. We're expected to be "good girls" and just keep quiet. We are taught to respect and revere adults, which is why they can take advantage of innocence.

As a girl grows up, she finds she gets a positive reaction from males when she pouts or bats her eyelashes just right. She also watches her friends become "popular" as they turn on the charm. She's been taught her entire life that male approval is the ultimate prize, winning his "love" and commitment. Learn the poses and win life's prizes!

Similarly, males gain approval through facing danger and behaving "macho". (Successful geometry calculations rarely brings on admiration of one's peers.) There is no female equivalent to the term "proving one's manhood". When men go ga-ga over the hot body that just strutted into the room, the other women start planning a make-over on themselves, even if they have to buy boobs off the shelf.

Even in movies and TV, just listen to the bow-chicka-bow/whoo-whoo saxiphone music that plays when a "sexy young thing" walks into view , or the camera distractedly pans off to the hottie walking by, emphasizing the male perspective. Girls get the message loud and clear... be hot or be not.

Sex education SHOULD be required teaching. Knowledge is power. Without knowledge, kids rely on their peers for information, such as "swallowing bleach prevents HIV!" If kids are armed with a solid understanding of the workings of sexuality, honest discourse on risky behavior as well as informed on the moral obligation of rejecting sex's commercialization, we might have fewer ruined young lives.

(Or we could just don burkhas so as not to arouse any attention at all.)

Sushi
"Don't worry about avoiding temptation, as you get older, it will avoid you."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nope. Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: Nope nope nope Posted by: Sushi
» RE: Nope nope nope-thank you Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: Nope nope nope Posted by: pfeifer999
In Japan these girls are worshiped as "Idols"
Posted by: corazon on May 24, 2008 10:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They have their own TV shows,videos, websites. Its all legal in Japan as long as the camera does not linger too long in the private areas.Its appearently cultural and they like their "lolitas". Idols encompass all oriental races, ie, Cambodian, Vietnamese, Chinese, etc. Some idols have gone on to have big careers after hitting the magic age of 18. Some have gone to become AV stars or bubble gum pop singers. The ages run from 8 to 18. Some finish college.

Heres and example of one:
http://wiki.theppn.org/Irie_Saaya
Appearently she is a cultural Ambasador of some renoun between China and Japan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:Japan = great culture Posted by: Dboy
» RE: Japan = great culture Posted by: richholland
» RE: Japan = great culture Posted by: vangogh69
» Japan = gutter culture (mostly) Posted by: Democratic Socialist
» clearly..... Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: clearly..... Posted by: richholland
lolita effect
Posted by: sherman on May 24, 2008 10:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
children do not voluntarily participate in our consensus reality, but are the victims of it. lolita effect is evidence of brainwashing that is in itself rape. we must preserve childrens' innocence, not exploit their vulnerability.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think media is integral to an agenda
Posted by: parviz45 on May 24, 2008 12:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I keep hearing that media is about the bottom line, and being a corporate entity this is a plausible statement. However, media's role is a lot more, I think it is part of a prevailing agenda to shape and mould us into beings who pose virtually no challenge to plutocracy, and in biblical terms, the sovereignty of mammon instead of morality and rationality and cultivation of perspective on the public domain of life which I imagine is premised on healthy democracy, the sovereignty of people. Just look at the issues in the US elections...how much do you hear about the immoral haves/have-nots gap which is an index of the health of our economy, or how is it that these criminal and unprovoked wars are continuing...How much concern do you think masses would have for the real issues when they are constantly preoccupied with below-the-neck issues? We should perhaps think along these lines to become aware of the artificial cocoon we live in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rampant Pedophilia
Posted by: macdon1 on May 24, 2008 12:16 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As far as I am concerned,this drooling over under 18 girls is simply criminal pedophilia. None of these girls has enough sense or life experience to really understand the exploitation and objectification that is going on. They are just enjoying the attention and thinking it means they are "loved." This is hardly new either...17 years ago when my daughter was in public high school most girls were dressing in heavy makeup, skirts that showed their panties and tight tops. The school assistant headmaster (dirty old man) called me in to a conference to discuss how unfeminine and rebellious my daughter was because she dressed in t-shirts and overalls and flannel shirts and no makeup. I told him I'd rather see my daughter looking like a junk shop (his words)than a street hooker. His constant ragging and nagging on my daughter, whom he labeled as a rebellious troublemaker caused her to drop out of school as soon as she was 16. Unfortunately I didn't have the money to put her in private school where parents can get jerks like this fired and the Boston public school system could have cared less. I am sure it is far worse now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ampant Pedophilia Posted by: Dboy
» RE: ampant Pedophilia Posted by: richholland
» RE: ampant Pedophilia Posted by: macdon1
» macdon1 -- what makes 18 the 'magic number'? Posted by: Democratic Socialist
» great example.... Posted by: pfeifer999
Let's increase regulation of the media
Posted by: PressurePoint on May 24, 2008 1:20 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The government is supposed to protect us from violence and in exchange we pay taxes (Locke). Republican and DLC politics have moved us further away from corporate regulation during a time of rapid expansion of predatory capitalism and increasingly sophistocated methods of exploiting us to our collective detriment. I submit the result is an epidemic of psychological violence being committed upon the American consumer daily by business. It's time Americans demand increasing governmental protection from corporate exploitation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Marxist Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters
Call it by it's proper name!
Posted by: luzmejor on May 24, 2008 2:11 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The malaise around sexuality is simply a sicker form of prejudice, folks.

Yes, the media and merchandisers are complicit. Yes, the parents are complicit, if they go along with urging to make sure their child is "popular" at school and has the latest pricy styles in clothing, cars, etc.

We ought to be treating our children like the precious resources they are and not simply an attractive social asset to be used.

Parents who care about their children do not allow one-on-one dating in high school. First of all, your child needs time and privacy to develop his or her own personality, along with studying for a future place in the adult world.

Couple-dating should be discussed, but not allowed for unaccompanied young teens. That's just asking for trouble. Who wants to leave his/her most important asset just lying around for any freak to pounce on and carry off?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is a place for further discussion on this matter ...
Posted by: realmuzik on May 24, 2008 2:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The National Conference on Media Reform is coming up. There are at least one or two panels on their schedule discussing women and the media. Am certain that discussions on the sexualization of children will indeed be brought up sometime during the course of this conference.

The aggressive marketing and advertising industries are to be held most accountable in this matter. Just take a look at Times Square in New York City. The "smut" of yesteryear has been overtaken by the "smut" of today - billboards upon billboards of Abercrombie and Fitch ads depicting more-than-half-naked "barely-legals," that also appear in mainstream magazines. Tighter regulations on these industries as a whole would be a major step in a "better" direction. But they, too, have 24/7 lobbying machines ever-prepared to ensure that they keep doing what they do. Not to mention that we have a First Amendment that will never, ever be changed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What would this author of thought ...
Posted by: bornxeyed on May 24, 2008 2:32 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
of my three 4 yr old to 10 yr old sisters all getting the go-go boots they asked for one Xmas back in 1970?

Young girls want to emulate older girls and women. If mature women demand the freedom to dress and act like sluts, young girls will want to dress and act like sluts too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Girls are told that their worth hinges on being 'hot,'"
Posted by: Sojourner on May 24, 2008 3:38 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry that is from only a couple paragraphs into the article, That's as far as I was willing to go. Yes, others judge us worthy or unworthy. But we judge them in return.

Isn't the "worth" alluded to what we mean by "dress for success." Unless you are independently wealthy, you must to some degree sell yourself, trade your labor, your abilities. So the argument can only be either over how you judge your worth and how much credibility you give to other's judgments.

Adolescents need to be given some time to form their own self-estimation. As has been pointed out upthread, selling "hotness" is ubiquitous. That's because it works for those who need to sell themselves. To imagine that sexuality is not at work at all times, for all ages, is simple-minded--or American, as the case may be. Sex can be a currency, but no one forces that on us.

[« Reply to th