Gender Issues Posted by christian h., 22 Aug 2007 04:47 am

Undermining gender stereotypes one stuffed animal at a time

Last month, I took the train from Champaign up to Chicago as final step in my move up here. Now I own a little stuffed dog called Albert (less mess than a real dog, and talks more), and I didn’t have the heart to just stuff him into my backpack and leave him in the dark, as it were. So I let his head peak out the top. Now this is of course “something little girls do” - certainly not grown-up men. Or so I realized from the reactions of random fellow passengers.

Some just stared, but a few asked about the dog, probably wondering if I was sane (a fair question, to be sure). This was a good thing, in fact - it got me talking to people, when otherwise we would just have walked past each other blindly. For example, I got to talk to a couple going up to Chicago for their 40th wedding anniversary.

So, did I unwittingly undermine some gender stereotype by openly carrying around a stuffed animal? I am not so sure if “men don’t own stuffed animals” is merely a question of gender; clearly, it is also age-related. It seems to me the real story here might be the “girlification” of women in the last fifteen years or so - or, if you want to put it positively, the liberating effect girl power has had on what grown women can do.

On the other hand, men “acting like boys [are supposed to act by cultural convention]” hasn’t elicited comment for some time now (”boys will be boys”) - there was simply no need for “boy power” (and let’s all breathe a sigh of relief here).

In the end, I do not believe sexism would be seriously undermined even if every man alive dressed in pink and carried stuffed animals around. To overcome it, more than just expression is needed. But you know what, it would sure be fun!

Trackbacks

Responses to “Undermining gender stereotypes one stuffed animal at a time”

  1. on 22 Aug 2007 at 6:30 am 1. Kiera PSI said …

    We won’t talk about the MOJ and her stuffed animal habits here. Hmm, nor about mine. I don’t think either of us can be accused of being girly girls, so the stereotype must have broken somewhere along the way.

    But kudos to Christian for doing his part to break it for the guys! Or maybe this fits into the “nerd” stereotype?

  2. on 22 Aug 2007 at 9:36 am 2. Seattle said …

    Really? The MOJ has a stuffed animal habit? I’ll have to make a note of that for next Christmas…

    I’ve noticed that while my youngest son doesn’t actually play with stuffed animals, neither does he want to donate them. Contemplating building another room on the house just for toys (that don’t get played with.)

    I know someone else who kept a large German Shepard stuffed animal at her house in liu of a real one-no mess, no noise, and the grandson can pretend it’s real… All part of the ongoing effort by a portion of the population to reduce their responsibilities in my mind, but that’s just me-the real pet owner. And I’m NOT cranky from lack of sleep because my pets wake me every night barking at passersby. So THERE!

  3. on 22 Aug 2007 at 9:58 am 3. Oaktown Girl said …

    I think if I saw any adult out in public with a stuffed animal, my first thought would be that they are a parent and the animal belongs to one of their kids. And of course you have to let the little head poke out so it can breathe. Like, duh!

    OK, let’s get this straight right now. I do not, repeat, DO NOT have a stuffed animal habit. In fact, I’d completely gotten rid of all my childhood stuffed animals. (I had not acquired any new stuffed animals at all since childhood, but neither had they been donated or tossed).

    Then the stuffed animals all began coming back again…as gifts.** It all started when I got the most adorable little puppy dog from my ex-Boy Toy for my birthday. Then he gave me big beautiful teddy bear at Valentine’s Day. Then those two seemed to attract stuffed animal gifts from other sectors, (which shall not be named, Kiera), all of which are precious and adorable, but please, no more! (This does not include the plushy Gojira and plushy 3Tops, which Party Patriot, Kiera, tells me she is in the process of acquiring for The Party).

    **I do admit to purchasing one, and only one, myself. It was for hug/comfort therapy when I was in the midst of the job from hell that was killing me both physically and psychologically. It did actually seem to help.

  4. on 22 Aug 2007 at 10:11 am 4. James Killus said …

    Recovered memory of a conversation taking place in a darkened room of an in-laws house, said room serving as a guest room for me and the missus. Said room also had shelving on three sides, the top shelf containing nothing but stuffed animals:

    Me: One or two is okay, but there must be a couple of dozen of them up there. They’re all fluffy, fluffy, I tell you! Even their eyes are fluffy.

    Her: Don’t let it bother you. You’ve been driving all day. Get some sleep.

    Me: I can’t sleep. They’re plotting against us, observing us to learn our weaknesses.

    Her: They’re set back on the shelves. You can’t really even see them from here.

    Me: That doesn’t mean they can’t see us. They’re sneaky little critters. Maybe even monsters. Who knows what they turn into when we can’t see them.

    Her: But if we can’t see them, how can they see us?

    Me: Ceilings are mirrors to fluffy eyes.

  5. on 22 Aug 2007 at 10:49 am 5. Seattle said …

    LOL Ok, now I’m having creepy movies about evil toys that come alive at night flashbacks.

  6. on 22 Aug 2007 at 10:49 am 6. Oaktown Girl said …

    Me: I can’t sleep. They’re plotting against us, observing us to learn our weaknesses.

    First, you almost got me in trouble for exposing my at-work blog activity by making me laugh so loud.

    Second, it’s quite possible you weren’t being paranoid. The cute little dog (Tuffy) my ex Boy Toy gave me, after observing a power vacuum, seized power and proclaimed himself “Prince” (a falsely humble title - he has the absolute power of an Emperor) over all the stuffed animals in His realm. (I believe Tuffy’s “realm” now includes all WAAGNFNP territory since christian’s opened the floodgates with this post). I’ve just been informed that Albert’s person and properties have now been incorporated, so Prince Tuffy now has holdings in the greater Chicago area as well, and is eye-balling Pennsylvania.

    Don’t worry, christian. The stuffed animals thrive under Tuffy’s rule. It’s kind of like having a union.

  7. on 22 Aug 2007 at 11:06 am 7. Seattle said …

    “So, did I unwittingly undermine some gender stereotype by openly carrying around a stuffed animal? I am not so sure if “men don’t own stuffed animals” is merely a question of gender; clearly, it is also age-related. It seems to me the real story here might be the “girlification” of women in the last fifteen years or so - or, if you want to put it positively, the liberating effect girl power has had on what grown women can do.”

    There have been a few news articles lately about the increase in services aimed at indulging the childlike side of today’s more affluent adults. The return of the cupcake comes to mind, the gaming centers that have more adults than children populating them, etc. I think that given the voracious appetite for new fads of a childlike nature, carrying around a personal stuffed pet has all sorts of money making possibilites. The pet hedge fund alternative…

  8. on 22 Aug 2007 at 11:30 am 8. Oaktown Girl said …

    Re: the Girlification of women, I saw this at its worst when I was living in Hawaii. In the late 90’s (I left in mid ’99, I don’t know if this persisted), the fad was for young women (esp. the Asian ones) to become the most extreme Baby Dolls they could possibly be. They would carry round Hello Kitty lunch boxes that rightfully belonged to kindergartners, their school binders were also the bright pinks of a first grader, and on and on. The high-schoolers who happened to go to Catholic school had the “best” ensemble because they could top it all off with the Catholic schoolgirl skirt and bobby socks.

    It mad me sick, and deeply sad. It seemed the absolute pinnacle of the feminist backlash: the real life results of a generation force feed anti-feminist propaganda (hairy-legged ball-bashing man-haters) from day one.

  9. on 22 Aug 2007 at 12:15 pm 9. JP Stormcrow said …

    Hmmm, a stuffed-animal carrying commie foreigner. After the revolution and the hedge fund managers really take control, your kind will be the first up against the wall. (Unless of course your pulling down a lot of Benjamins … then I’m sure something can be worked out.) And don’t even try to pretend that you like sports, we’re on to you.

    So here is a stereotype I am trying to work on - while I sit here in my daughter’s room on playing hooky from some Meat the Dean crapola on move-in day, I notice that my daughter’s roommate’s books include The Prophet and The Da Vinci Code. I think that I have basically decided that I am an arrogant snob who would classify an 18-year-old by their taste in books… Certainly easier than reexamining my biases.

  10. on 22 Aug 2007 at 12:30 pm 10. Oaktown Girl said …

    JP - is The Prophet snubworthy?

  11. on 22 Aug 2007 at 1:11 pm 11. Seattle said …

    Know thyself. ; )

  12. on 22 Aug 2007 at 1:34 pm 12. JP Stormcrow said …

    JP - is The Prophet snubworthy?

    … to me … it was on the list of The Twelve Mementoes of Sweetness and Light if you recall. But don’t listen to me - I’m a judgmental asshole. For some reason it always grated on me.

  13. on 22 Aug 2007 at 2:01 pm 13. James Killus said …

    JP - is The Prophet snubworthy?

    Mr. Furious: Okay, am I the only one who finds these sayings just a little bit formulaic? “If you want to push something down, you have to pull it up. If you want to go left, you have to go right.” It’s…
    The Sphinx: Your temper is very quick, my friend. But until you learn to master your rage…
    Mr. Furious: …your rage will become your master? That’s what you were going to say. Right? Right?
    The Sphinx: Not necessarily.

    –from Mystery Men, the Movie

  14. on 22 Aug 2007 at 2:06 pm 14. Seattle said …

    I’ve never read “The Prophet”. I’m trying to figure out if that means I’m well read, or ignorant… ; )

  15. on 22 Aug 2007 at 2:40 pm 15. christian h. said …

    All I can say is that The Da Vinci Code makes a mockery of so many things. Not the catholic church, mind; but: Paris, research in Paris (author claims to have spent a year there but can’t even get the train stations right - bah!), new ideas, good writing, not to mention keeping up a story arc.

    Did I mention I’m not impressed by that book?

  16. on 22 Aug 2007 at 2:54 pm 16. Oaktown Girl said …

    Oaktown Girl: JP - is The Prophet snubworthy?
    Seattle: Know thyself. ; )

    Well, yes. Except that my duties as Minister of Justice are such that I usually delegate my High Council and Cabinet Officers to advise on official WAAGNFNP declarations of what is and isn’t snubworthy.

    James - that quote is hysterical. I did see Mystery Men, but it was years ago. How do you manage to remember this stuff?

    To expand on my comment in #8 - the reason (if not patently obvious) I say the Baby Doll trend was clearly backlash related is because the young women were doing it as a means of making themselves more attractive to young men, as if the way a female can be most alluring is to be the least “threatening” she can possibly be – which would be childhood. A grown, mature woman presenting the appearance of being capable of having her own opinions and making her own decisions? Ack! What a turn-off!

    The idea behind this baby doll-ification is, of course, equally insulting to males. It’s just that the focus is all about pressure on the females: the validation imperative to attract males by any means necessary, even if it means making a show of publicly diminishing one’s self.

  17. on 22 Aug 2007 at 3:02 pm 17. Seattle said …

    Now I did read “The Davinci Code”. Got to the end and thought, “Gee, isn’t that convenient? The guy got the woman who just happens to be the decendent of Jesus Christ? JESUS CHRIST!!!” It went downhill from there.

    Pubicly dimishing one’s self….So I was walking the halls of work today and I saw a woman wearing a strongly pink blouse. Over the blouse she had on a lace half blouse tied off under the breasts. Now the woman was perfectly well endowed to begin with and the additional emphasis from the second layer of clothing made me wonder why she didn’t just paint a sign on her forehead, “Look at me and my breasts!” which in so many words she had. The baby doll stuff is just more of the same. It was big in Japan when I was there decades ago. In a word, “cute” is not threatening.

  18. on 22 Aug 2007 at 3:47 pm 18. James Killus said …

    James - that quote is hysterical. I did see Mystery Men, but it was years ago. How do you manage to remember this stuff?

    His excellent memory and his OCD (”It’s a gift…. and a curse”) allow him to see patterns and details where other people see nothing.

  19. on 22 Aug 2007 at 3:55 pm 19. Kiera PSI said …

    Did I mention I’m not impressed by that book?

    Join the club. I put it down at least five times (I’m a read a book in one sitting girl), and stopped reading it to read at least three other books in the meantime. It was boring, clichéd, hackneyed, you name it. I was singularly unimpressed.

  20. on 22 Aug 2007 at 9:52 pm 20. Oaktown Girl said …

    My brother had a doll when he was very young. It was specifically for boys, and the doll was a boy/young man in a football uniform, complete with helmet and carrying a football. The whole thing was made out of doll plastic (I don’t know the proper term), there was no cloth clothing or anything on it.

    My brother loved that thing, and carried it around until he either outgrew it or was shamed into no longer carrying it around. I don’t know which came first. But in any event, for years after the fact, our father teased my brother a lot about having had that doll. And of course, it really irked the hell out of my brother because he was definitely a “traditional” boy: hot wheels, trading cards, comic books, building models: cars, airplanes, and aircraft carriers, and then later blowing them up with firecrackers, etc.

  21. on 22 Aug 2007 at 10:55 pm 21. Spyke said …

    “for years after the fact, our father teased my brother a lot about having had that doll.”

    I have to wonder if your father’s reaction was triggered by insecurity or jealousy.
    At any rate, it’s too bad that your brother was teased about something that meant nothing.

    Maybe if your brother had called it an action figure…?

  22. on 23 Aug 2007 at 8:39 am 22. Seattle said …

    LOL Scene from a Jimmy Neutron episode I was tortured by watching while in a hotel room in Forks, Washington a couple of weekends ago:

    Carl: Well at least I don’t play with dolls!
    Sheen: Action Figures!
    Carl: Dolls!
    Sheen ACTION FIGURES!!
    Carl: DOLLS!
    etc…

  23. on 23 Aug 2007 at 10:27 am 23. Oaktown Girl said …

    I have to wonder if your father’s reaction was triggered by insecurity or jealousy.

    Spyke – actually, it was neither. My dad was just a classic product of his times who frequently got his jollies from playing psychological games and power trips on his family. (I’m sugar-coating that).

    On the positive side, if there had been any real concern at all that my brother might have been actually been a poofta, my dad would not have teased him nearly so much (if at all) about that doll he’d been attached to as a kid. And of course during the time when my brother was actually playing with the doll, my dad said nothing which, giving credit where it’s due, was fairly forward-thinking for the time (c.1965-66)

    As for the “action figure” strategy, my brother did protest (endlessly and fruitlessly) that it wasn’t a “doll” (except that it was). He did indeed counter with “action figure”, but it’s just like the Republicans do now with their talking points and echo machine. Once the “doll” attack was in place with all its myriad and damming connotations, there was no turning back. Dad had set the terms of debate, and they weren’t going to be changed, so the battle was already lost.

  24. on 23 Aug 2007 at 10:39 am 24. JP Stormcrow said …

    Ok, am not so grumpy today now that I got more than 3 hours sleep last night. So cancel my completely uncharitable comments re: the books. Well not on the books themselves. I still do not like either of them … I think it was easier to dislike The Prophet 30-40 years ago, when it seemed to be earnestly championed everywhere you turned. There is a reason it inspired things like this parody from the early 70s. But I should be pleased that any 18-year-old is reading, owning books, attending college … period, end of story - grumpy, old a-holes not entitled to broadcast an opinion on the content of the reading material.

    More on topic. I did notice that my daughter and her roommate both had discreet small stuffed animals (As far as I could tell my daughter’s was a bat … but a cute, fluffy bat - and yes I noticed it traveled with head out for air.) My wife claimed to have spotted one in a room that appeared to be nearly as big as the bed it was sitting on… which given dorm room sizes, appears to be a miss on shear practicality, gender and/or aesthetic considerations aside. I guess I missed my chance to an impromptu, informal survey on how the genders split on bringing stuffies to school.