7 ms·

Girls' Life vs. Boys' Life? Magazine Cover Sparks Uproar

26 points by marcusgarvey 10y ago

informatimago 10y ago
Once for all you'll have to understand that without a good distribution of roles (girls must grow to be moms making and educating babies; boys must grow to be warriors (including scientists, explorers, farmers, etc) to defend women and children against invaders of all kinds, then you won't live happy old days, because you'll be invaded, raped and dead by then. The uproar should be against that uproar!
- CydeWeys 10y ago
  Huh? Exactly what century was this post written from exactly?
  - Chronic9q 10y ago
    He is saying you cannot change gender norms. If you try, you will fail in your own life.
    - chris_wot 10y ago
      There is a missing bracket in there somewhere and the bit of my brain that does lexical parsing forced me to eventually abort processing.
    - CydeWeys 10y ago
      That's also not making sense to me. Women clearly are capable of being scientists, so what's wrong with criticizing magazines that only talk about beauty tips? And why would that necessarily lead to "failing in your own life"? It obviously doesn't. Look at, e.g., Sheryl Sandberg.
      - Diamons 10y ago
        And for every Sheryl Sandberg there's 10 men. Being the exception != being the norm.
        CydeWeys 10y ago
        That's not the ratio of men to women in the tech industry, and said ratio is not caused by competency discrepancies. It's actually partially caused by exactly this kind of sexist drivel that you're spouting; who would want to enter an industry that is so unwelcoming? Why is there so much sexist trash in the HN comments today?
        Diamons 10y ago
        Just because you disagree with an opinion does not make it sexism. If anything it exaggerates your own self prescribed ignorance.
        krastanov 10y ago
        Theirs is not just an opinion when you have a few decades of sociological research to back it up. If you want to see research supporting the claim that you are wrong a good starting point would be Project Implicit's webpage. Indeed, the person that responded to you could have been less inflammatory, but it is pretty hard to keep it cool when you are surrounded by people that dismiss an entire group of people based on gender, sexual orientation or skin color.
        CydeWeys 10y ago
        FYI, the definition of sexism I'm using is the dictionary one, not "things I disagree with". I called your opinion sexist because it is sexist. Here's the definition: 1. prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially discrimination against women. 2. behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex. If you want to argue, instead of going all ad hominem and somehow trying to make it be about my supported ignorance or inability to handle disagreement, let's actually stick to the issues.
- krastanov 10y ago
  Pardon me, I guess this is sarcasm, but I do not get the reference/joke.
  - joefife 10y ago
    Me neither - I just assumed it was one of the MGTOW crazies.
    - CydeWeys 10y ago
      The comments here are super-disappointing.
      - krastanov 10y ago
        Actually, I sincerely thought that the original comment was trying to make a progressive point veiled in so much sarcasm as to make it difficult to understand. I guess I was too naive... And they were simply making a disturbingly sexist comment...
- tomrod 10y ago
  When huge groups organize to force gender norms to be crystallized into society, it prevents the evolution of that society to respond successfully to dangers and problems that face it. A great example of 15 million or so people adopting this was the Mormon Proclamation on the Family [0], which set a mission statement for their religion that continues to result in political problems and furor.[1] [2] These groups organizing to fight against existence of their taboo are a great issue, one that will often organize to prevent testing the unknown. I don't know if it's my relative youth and inexperience, but it seems to be getting worse than it was in times past, when entire cultures migrated or philosophically shifted (e.g. Polynesian settlement, the Enlightenment, etc.). Links: [0] https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-student-study-guide/the-worldwide-church/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world?lang=eng https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008... [2] http://kutv.com/news/local/defeated-in-the-us-lds-church-takes-fight-against-same-sex-marriage-to-mexico http://kutv.com/news/local/defeated-in-the-us-lds-church-tak...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
home_boi 10y ago
IIRC, Boy's Life magazine is run by a boy scout organization while Girl's Life is run by a corporation chasing for the most eyeballs possible.
- CydeWeys 10y ago
  It's mentioned in the article. Boy's Life actually has a noble mission behind it, whereas Girl's Life is for-profit trash (essentially). The parallelism between the names of the two is an unfortunate coincidence. Near as I can tell the Girl Scouts don't have a magazine, but if they did, it would be a better comparison against Boy's Life. Maybe they should publish one?
  - UnoriginalGuy 10y ago
    As an aside, The Girl Scouts is a really fantastic organisation. In particular compared to The Boy Scouts in the US (which is much more religiously affiliated and discriminates against gay people; The Girl Scouts by contrast are trans-inclusive).
    - adamrezich 10y ago
      I was never in the Scouts myself, but surely one archaic, discriminatory policy doesn't negate all of the good the organization does, right?
Spooky23 10y ago
The problem is that with all of the bullshit aside, they need to sell the magazine to some dwindling population still buying them. The "heartwarming", positive cover is indeed heartwarming and a good message, but is also pretty lame, and unlikely to sell magazines. I also question whether this is typical shallow/ignorant internet outrage. When I was a kid, Boy'a Life was a Boy Scouts magazine, and had annual themes that appeared every year at the same time. If you looked at the May/June cover, the annual Boy Scout Jamboree issue wouldn't be as "internet offensive".
hammock 10y ago
There are plenty of men's magazines that will offer you a "denim checklist."
relics443 10y ago
Maybe it's just my lack of need for external influence, but why is this a big deal? I think women can and should be whatever they want to be. A trashy magazine shouldn't change that. Should A Girl's Life change the tone of their stories? That's up to the market. As long as their demographic enjoys what they print (which translates to $$$), they'll continue to run it. Should people be outraged by it? If they choose to be, yes. But at the end of the day a consumer is a consumer, and if they want trash they'll get it.
- krastanov 10y ago
  I can not provide links right now, but reading up on "stereotype threat" will probably explain why this still matters. I a few words: the same person performing the same task will perform lower if they are aware of a stereotype that says that their group performs worse at the given task. It is reproduced for white and black, male and female, etc.
  - commentzorro 10y ago
    But why would that mean anything to the publisher? They want to sell the magazine and if soul crushing mind rotting stereotypes sell copies at the checkout line then why would the publisher want to be the moral agents of change?
    - krastanov 10y ago
      Fair point. My personal answer, that I do not try to push on others, is that we all should try to be agents of change. To be fair to the publisher they made it clear that they have quality content next to the cheap content.
marcusgarvey 10y ago
Why was this flagged?
- krastanov 10y ago
  Some of the flagged comment in the discussion were very sexist. The rest of the flagged comments were people a bit aggressively calling them out. I guess all the up and down voting triggered a flame war detector. Which is really sad, I really hoped we can all agree that your sex does not determine whether you are a good engineer.
trav4225 10y ago
This is indeed a humorous juxtaposition, but they wouldn't make crap like that if our society didn't gobble it up.

26 points by marcusgarvey 10y ago

Once for all you'll have to understand that without a good distribution of roles (girls must grow to be moms making and educating babies; boys must grow to be warriors (including scientists, explorers, farmers, etc) to defend women and children against invaders of all kinds, then you won't live happy old days, because you'll be invaded, raped and dead by then. The uproar should be against that uproar!

CydeWeys 10y ago
Huh? Exactly what century was this post written from exactly?
- Chronic9q 10y ago
  He is saying you cannot change gender norms. If you try, you will fail in your own life.
  - chris_wot 10y ago
    There is a missing bracket in there somewhere and the bit of my brain that does lexical parsing forced me to eventually abort processing.
  - CydeWeys 10y ago
    That's also not making sense to me. Women clearly are capable of being scientists, so what's wrong with criticizing magazines that only talk about beauty tips? And why would that necessarily lead to "failing in your own life"? It obviously doesn't. Look at, e.g., Sheryl Sandberg.
    - Diamons 10y ago
      And for every Sheryl Sandberg there's 10 men. Being the exception != being the norm.
      - CydeWeys 10y ago
        That's not the ratio of men to women in the tech industry, and said ratio is not caused by competency discrepancies. It's actually partially caused by exactly this kind of sexist drivel that you're spouting; who would want to enter an industry that is so unwelcoming? Why is there so much sexist trash in the HN comments today?
        Diamons 10y ago
        Just because you disagree with an opinion does not make it sexism. If anything it exaggerates your own self prescribed ignorance.
        krastanov 10y ago
        Theirs is not just an opinion when you have a few decades of sociological research to back it up. If you want to see research supporting the claim that you are wrong a good starting point would be Project Implicit's webpage. Indeed, the person that responded to you could have been less inflammatory, but it is pretty hard to keep it cool when you are surrounded by people that dismiss an entire group of people based on gender, sexual orientation or skin color.
        CydeWeys 10y ago
        FYI, the definition of sexism I'm using is the dictionary one, not "things I disagree with". I called your opinion sexist because it is sexist. Here's the definition: 1. prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially discrimination against women. 2. behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex. If you want to argue, instead of going all ad hominem and somehow trying to make it be about my supported ignorance or inability to handle disagreement, let's actually stick to the issues.
krastanov 10y ago
Pardon me, I guess this is sarcasm, but I do not get the reference/joke.
- joefife 10y ago
  Me neither - I just assumed it was one of the MGTOW crazies.
  - CydeWeys 10y ago
    The comments here are super-disappointing.
    - krastanov 10y ago
      Actually, I sincerely thought that the original comment was trying to make a progressive point veiled in so much sarcasm as to make it difficult to understand. I guess I was too naive... And they were simply making a disturbingly sexist comment...
tomrod 10y ago
When huge groups organize to force gender norms to be crystallized into society, it prevents the evolution of that society to respond successfully to dangers and problems that face it. A great example of 15 million or so people adopting this was the Mormon Proclamation on the Family [0], which set a mission statement for their religion that continues to result in political problems and furor.[1] [2] These groups organizing to fight against existence of their taboo are a great issue, one that will often organize to prevent testing the unknown. I don't know if it's my relative youth and inexperience, but it seems to be getting worse than it was in times past, when entire cultures migrated or philosophically shifted (e.g. Polynesian settlement, the Enlightenment, etc.). Links: [0] https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-student-study-guide/the-worldwide-church/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world?lang=eng https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008... [2] http://kutv.com/news/local/defeated-in-the-us-lds-church-takes-fight-against-same-sex-marriage-to-mexico http://kutv.com/news/local/defeated-in-the-us-lds-church-tak...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

home_boi 10y ago

IIRC, Boy's Life magazine is run by a boy scout organization while Girl's Life is run by a corporation chasing for the most eyeballs possible.

CydeWeys 10y ago
It's mentioned in the article. Boy's Life actually has a noble mission behind it, whereas Girl's Life is for-profit trash (essentially). The parallelism between the names of the two is an unfortunate coincidence. Near as I can tell the Girl Scouts don't have a magazine, but if they did, it would be a better comparison against Boy's Life. Maybe they should publish one?
- UnoriginalGuy 10y ago
  As an aside, The Girl Scouts is a really fantastic organisation. In particular compared to The Boy Scouts in the US (which is much more religiously affiliated and discriminates against gay people; The Girl Scouts by contrast are trans-inclusive).
  - adamrezich 10y ago
    I was never in the Scouts myself, but surely one archaic, discriminatory policy doesn't negate all of the good the organization does, right?

Spooky23 10y ago

The problem is that with all of the bullshit aside, they need to sell the magazine to some dwindling population still buying them. The "heartwarming", positive cover is indeed heartwarming and a good message, but is also pretty lame, and unlikely to sell magazines. I also question whether this is typical shallow/ignorant internet outrage. When I was a kid, Boy'a Life was a Boy Scouts magazine, and had annual themes that appeared every year at the same time. If you looked at the May/June cover, the annual Boy Scout Jamboree issue wouldn't be as "internet offensive".

hammock 10y ago

There are plenty of men's magazines that will offer you a "denim checklist."

relics443 10y ago

Maybe it's just my lack of need for external influence, but why is this a big deal? I think women can and should be whatever they want to be. A trashy magazine shouldn't change that. Should A Girl's Life change the tone of their stories? That's up to the market. As long as their demographic enjoys what they print (which translates to $$$), they'll continue to run it. Should people be outraged by it? If they choose to be, yes. But at the end of the day a consumer is a consumer, and if they want trash they'll get it.

krastanov 10y ago
I can not provide links right now, but reading up on "stereotype threat" will probably explain why this still matters. I a few words: the same person performing the same task will perform lower if they are aware of a stereotype that says that their group performs worse at the given task. It is reproduced for white and black, male and female, etc.
- commentzorro 10y ago
  But why would that mean anything to the publisher? They want to sell the magazine and if soul crushing mind rotting stereotypes sell copies at the checkout line then why would the publisher want to be the moral agents of change?
  - krastanov 10y ago
    Fair point. My personal answer, that I do not try to push on others, is that we all should try to be agents of change. To be fair to the publisher they made it clear that they have quality content next to the cheap content.

marcusgarvey 10y ago

Why was this flagged?

krastanov 10y ago
Some of the flagged comment in the discussion were very sexist. The rest of the flagged comments were people a bit aggressively calling them out. I guess all the up and down voting triggered a flame war detector. Which is really sad, I really hoped we can all agree that your sex does not determine whether you are a good engineer.

trav4225 10y ago

This is indeed a humorous juxtaposition, but they wouldn't make crap like that if our society didn't gobble it up.