I Can Be a Computer Engineer Barbie Sends Girls the Opposite Message - Update
- Thread starter roseofbattle
- Start date
You misunderstood what I was trying to say, let me clarify: My problem was with the statement that it was casual sexism (as if there was no discussion in it). If I can disagree with something, it's an opinion. The rest of what it said about context etc. was a very short counter-argument to prove my point that it is indeed only one opinion of the matter. She also stated, as fact, that it made women feel 'unwelcome at STEM', but gave no evidence that anyone there had actually complained.ryukage_sama said:
What I meant about context was that the pictures on the shirt carried no context, e.g. if they were in the context of making a sandwich, that would be an obvious sexist jab, but I don't see how people can jump to conclusions from the mere depiction of women. It's sad that because men can appreciate the form of a female body it apparently means we all see them as objects, when there's no proof that upon meeting a real woman we'd treat them as anything less than a person.
You misunderstood what I was trying to say, let me clarify: My problem was with the statement that it was casual sexism (as if there was no discussion in it). If I can disagree with something, it's an opinion. The rest of what it said about context etc. was a very short counter-argument to prove my point that it is indeed only one opinion of the matter. She also stated, as fact, that it made women feel 'unwelcome at STEM', but gave no evidence that anyone there had actually complained.ryukage_sama said:
What I meant about context was that the pictures on the shirt carried no context, e.g. if they were in the context of making a sandwich, that would be an obvious sexist jab, but I don't see how people can jump to conclusions from the mere depiction of women. It's sad that because men can appreciate the form of a female body it apparently means we all see them as objects, when there's no proof that upon meeting a real woman we'd treat them as anything less than a person.
There's a difference between "sexism" and "bad influence".Booklover13 said:
You only have to look at the education list to see the blatant sexism in the minds of the creators.
It's easy to "fight" sexism by making a military option. It's far hard to go "Actually, let's make her a secondary maths teacher this time, rather than a primary school teacher for the 6th time."
Yep, sexist era produces sexist doll.
I agree entirely.
And that's an admirable goal. But good intentions does not automatically translate to good implementation.
I absolutely believe that most people working at Barbie are anti-sexism on a concious level. That doesn't mean that their subconscious prejudices don't have significant effects on the outcome.
Yes... Of course... There was absolutely no other way around that problem...
Not enough.
Seriously? Comparing sci-fi technology to modern day sexism is the best you could come up with?
And that's not even getting into the question of the sexism in how the perpetuated male ideal is about being powerful while the perpetuated female ideal is about being attractive to others... (and therefore really really aren't comparable)
Are you really trying to defend the body deformity by saying "Yeah, but this one doesn't have shoes with heels!"?
So that Barbie satire episode of the Simpsons actually happened in real life?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftde81QNXDY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftde81QNXDY
I'd also like to add this blog post by Randi Harper on her 20-odd years experience in tech, and how she faced (and still faces) harassment and belittlement because of her gender.Maze1125 said:
http://randi.io/wp/archives/86
Different field, but her experiences are broadly applicable.
They should keep the book as is and just title it "I can do a kickstarter videogame".
Then have Barbie list things like "crafting", "rogue-like", "retro", "survival", "revolutionary" and I'd congratulate them on their realistic portrayal of kickstarter games.
And oddly enough, that version wouldn't even be sexist, because "idea guy" is a unisex occupation.
Then have Barbie list things like "crafting", "rogue-like", "retro", "survival", "revolutionary" and I'd congratulate them on their realistic portrayal of kickstarter games.
And oddly enough, that version wouldn't even be sexist, because "idea guy" is a unisex occupation.
It still wouldn't be very 'empowering' though for the main character in a story to solve her problems by getting someone else to come fix things for her. If Barbie is so incompetent why is she the main character? Why not make the story about Brianna and Stephanie? My guess is that the writers didn't feel that their target audience would understand or be interested in programming, which is probably true[footnote]Put down your pitchforks, I simply mean that Barbies target audience is CHILDREN and coding is above most childrens' heads[/footnote], but also kinda undermines the entire point of the book.Baresark said:
Does this belong in news? I don't know if it's wrong or not but can we just give Carly her own column? With sexism being such a diverse and nuanced issue even among it's supporters, is it responsible from a journalistic standpoint to use a subjective headline and editorialize throughout? I realize in the wake of gamergate tensions are on high for this issue but just honestly speaking, this is not news as it lacks the quality if being "new" information and focuses on the opinion and social context of a book. Maybe you could say something like "critics pan Barbie book for 'sexist' message." I mean maybe it's just my opinion but I always thought it was journalism to present the facts and let the reader draw they're own conclusion. This is already drawn for me forcing me to ask myself "really?"
The book sounds idiotic, but that shirt looks glorious. I would not have worn it for my big day on television, but no, that damned shirt is not a bit of "casual mysogyny." The linked article's headline says it all; I don't care that you helped do something extraordinary that pushes our understanding forward, that shirt is awful! The fact that anyone would claim that that shirt somehow demonstrates contempt for women seems absurd. The fact that they would value the man's contribution to science less because they don't like his shirt is pants-on-head stupid.
I hope that's a typo, but in either case, I find it hilarious. It get's the same point across as "prince" which I assume was the word you'd meant to use, but instead of being supported by one rich guy it's (presumably) a bunch of horny Johns.josemlopes said:
Wow that's bad. What's next? Barbie's "I can be a Navy SEAL: So long as guys are doing the actual fighting, I'll just take the Medals?"
Is anyone surprised that an entire generation of girls are being talked down to like that? Well, here's hoping that the next generation isn't as screwed up as this one.
Is anyone surprised that an entire generation of girls are being talked down to like that? Well, here's hoping that the next generation isn't as screwed up as this one.
If you followed the link, you would have read that there were indeed complaints about the shirt being worn to work and while representing the agency to the world. His shirt displayed sexually provocative images of women, what can also be described as a depiction of women as decoration. It is a fact that women at STEM are made uncomfortable by "casual sexism". You are right that specific evidence isn't provided in this article, but that is a pedantic complaint because the assertion remains true regardless of whether or not you are aware of the evidence. If you had proof that her assertion was false, you would have a legitimate grievance. This is not the case. The article regarding the shirt referenced in the article contains links to such evidence.Alexander Kirby said:
As to the immediate effects of wearing the shirt: Basic gender sensitivity training (and discussions with people who have been affected by the lack of such sensitivity) would have told you that displays of sexual objectification tend to make the people of the depicted gender feel less like a person and more like an object. The problem isn't that the man would find women attractive, or that he would have such images in his home or on his body. The problem is that he brought it into his work, he brought it in front of his coworkers and the entire international community. He put that imagery, of provocatively dressed, unrealistically proportioned women, which he wears for his own gratification, on display for all his coworkers to see. All the women he works with would have to stand there, looking at sexually objectified images of women and feel worse for it. That's the effect of sexism. Regardless of whether or not you intend to hurt their feelings or make them feel like less of a person, it won't change that it does. You don't get to decide what hurts other people. The rest of the world shouldn't have to demonstrate to you EVERY TIME it happens, every time somebody is the the victim of sexism, regardless of however thoughtless or unintended it may be, that the victims exist. That victims could exist is reason to consider our actions in advance.
We should be able to see the effects of our actions if we just think about how what we do affects those around us. We need to keep working so that we all have the consideration to maintain a respectful environment.
TL;DR "The Barbie story book is stopping girls from getting into computer gaming"
If a book of a character who is already a debatabley negative portrayl of women is stopping you from getting into gaming... then make your own games, call every gamer a white-male-cis-sexist shet lord, deter some of the female gamers in the process, then act totally suprised when they dont give you any of their money or ad revenue towards anyone who writes articles about mysoginerds.
Sorry, I forget that Im too brown to speak for myself since every other thing i say is Burrito Chihuahua Taco Grande. Maybe call some white women ive never heard of before to speak on my behalf. Because Im just too Internal Racist for my own good, and again cant speak for myself Chalupa Salsa Verde
Also if your going to google my name to check my sock puppet status, Im grinning ugly guy in the 2nd image result.
If a book of a character who is already a debatabley negative portrayl of women is stopping you from getting into gaming... then make your own games, call every gamer a white-male-cis-sexist shet lord, deter some of the female gamers in the process, then act totally suprised when they dont give you any of their money or ad revenue towards anyone who writes articles about mysoginerds.
Sorry, I forget that Im too brown to speak for myself since every other thing i say is Burrito Chihuahua Taco Grande. Maybe call some white women ive never heard of before to speak on my behalf. Because Im just too Internal Racist for my own good, and again cant speak for myself Chalupa Salsa Verde
Also if your going to google my name to check my sock puppet status, Im grinning ugly guy in the 2nd image result.
I'd say it does more than that. Barbie pretty much wrecked everything. Wrecked her computer, got her sister's assignment lost, etc. That's not exactly the kind of image you want for a story about becoming a software engineer though it'd be decent for a story about learning some half-assed moral lesson about being careful and asking for help and what not. There's nothing wrong that Barbie is asking for help, but she is shown to be incompetent at the stuff a computer engineer should be able to handle. They're not just simple accidents either; she messed up EVERYTHING. It's basically I Can Not Be a Computer Engineer.Houseman said:
The fact that both of the people who can handle the coding are male is a point to be made, but that's a more debatable one. It's not bad they're male, but because there are no other coding friends in her story one can argue it is presenting guys as technical people and girls as artsy people, an old stereotype with no evidence whatsoever. In fact, it's practically been dis-proven. As I said though, that particular claim of sexism is more debatable. It does mean this should have been titled I Can Be A Game Designer though.
Though, it does open up for criticism for why the heck this is titled as if it's about computer engineering when it's clearly about software engineering and that ignorance permeates through the book (Why does the teacher wear a lab coat?). You already brought that up though Houseman. Books aimed towards toddlers, the youngest of the young, don't need to be complex, but they should be accurate in their basic representation or all those moral messages, messages based on getting the basic representations of life right, are meaningless. Of course, these tend to be platitude garbage even when presented well, so whatever.
I am not saying whether I agree or disagree with the critics. I'm just explaining the perspective of the critics, mostly to Big Tuk since I quoted two of you.