Instructions:

(i) You are to search for things on both sides of each

issue.

(ii) You are to search for a variety of sources or

levels of content, not just one type--e.g., articles and

reports, books, journals, magazines, online discussions,

product descriptions, pamphlets, movie scripts,

archives, song lyrics, etc. etc.)

(iii) For this Bibliography report you are to answer a

minimum of 6 research questions to be selected from the

list below.

1. Television characters and sexism

It has been claimed that the proportion of male

characters on television makes children's programs

sexist. What evidence or opinions can you find for and

against this claim?

2. Commercials and cartoons

Is there any connection between the images of

appropriate male and female behavior in cartoons and the

types of products advertised in the commercials which

accompany them? What relationships can be found between

different programs and the products which sponsor them?

3. Conflicts of adolescent girls

What are some of the possible conflicts between cultural

scripts and authentic selves of adolescent girls? What

evidence or opinions can you find on this issue?

4. Sexist jokes and men

Why do many men find sexist jokes about women amusing?

Do men benefit form this type of humor? What evidence or

opinions can you find for this topic.

5. Coca-Cola with aspirin

Combining Coca-Cola and aspirin will get you high. Find

evidence and opinion for and against this claim.

6. Talents of successful people

Many successful people are no more talented than

unsuccessful people. Find evidence and opinion for and

against this claim.

7. Instant gratification without patience

Someone stated that today we live in a culture of

instant gratification, where the attributes of patience

and determination are hard to find. Find evidence and

opinion for and against this claim.

8. Helping yourself by helping others

?The best way to help yourself is to help others.? What

type of people believe this principle of life? Where is

this statement being used, by whom, and for what

purpose? What has been written about this belief?

9. Success is hanging on

?Success is largely hanging on after others have let

go.? Is there evidence for this claim? In what context

do people say this?

10. Judged by what we finish

?Keep your promises. We are judged by what we finish,

not by what we start.? Find evidence and opinions for or

against this advice.

11. Kicked while down

?People always remember two things: who kicked you when

you were down, and who helped you up.? Find evidence and

opinions for or against this claim. Who tends to say

this?

12. Woman and man's role

It has been said about relationships that a woman?s role

is to help her man to improve himself, and wise is the

man who cooperates. Find evidence and opinions for or

against this claim. Who tends to be for, who against?

Why?

13. Driving without compassion

Aggressive driving has been attributed by some people to

traffic congestion and time pressure, while others

believe that it is the result of lack of compassion and

caring for one another on the road. Explore what is

being said on both sides of the issue.

14. Optimism and self-efficacy

One view is that it?s good to believe in yourself and in

positive outcomes (e.g., self-efficacy and optimism),

but there are those who disagree (e.g., pessimism,

cynicism). Which belief is expressed where, by whom, and

how?

15. Other approved topics

Make up your own research question, email it to Dr.

James at leon@hawaii.edu and ask if it?s OK. If

approved, you can then use it as one of the Research

Questions.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The above is taken from

the Instructions for your bibliography Report located

at:

www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy18/g18bibliography.html

Personally I think that the claim of male characters on

television making children's programs sexist could be

true for the current generation but not necessarily

through the years of television. I can remember when I

was young watching girl shows such as 'My Little

Ponies,' 'Strawberry Shortcake,' and 'Rainbow Bright.'

These shows did have male characters in them but they

were directed towards girls. On the other hand, males of

my generation recall watching such cartoons as

'Transformers,' 'G.I. Joe,' and 'HeMan,' and of course

both sexes occasionally watched eachothers chartoons.

Today there is still a division of what girls and boys

watch, but through controversy sexism is always brought

up in every cartoon which in my conclusion is inevitable

because humans are a sex and will forever be involved in

sexism.

Two interesting articles I found on the internet were

"Kids TV: A guide for the perplexed"

by Steve Sailer, and "Smurfy Sexism: Created with a

biased hand"

Mariruth Graham. Take a breif look at the articles. The

first article gives examples of different shows and the

sexims involved, and the second points out the

stereotypes of women in the well known cartoon 'The

Smurfs.' In the first article Steve Sailer brings up the

point that most Disney movies are focused towards the

female audience, which is a strong contradictory point

to for the claim of male characters making programs

sexist. However Mariruth Graham takes a look at the

classic cartoon which only contains one female and she

reports that "Smurfette's physical characteristics draw

her as a stereotype which promotes sexism because of the

prejudice messages the writers illustrate." Both

articles take a look at sexism on cartoons and have good

supporting evidence. Alltogether, I remain with the

conculsion that there will always be controversy on

sexism because we are sex.

The question, "Will Coca-Cola and aspirin get you high?"

just sounds false. These are one of the many urban

legends that circulate among people, mainly teenagers,

such as "If you make a silly face and get slapped hard

on the back, you'll stay like that forever" or "if you

step on a crack, you'll break your mother's back."

However, taking aspirin alone is a risk for some people,

depending on thier sensitivity to certain medicines.

Sometimes it's hard to judge if the statement is true or

not because some urban legends seem so real. There's

one urban legend that appeared on MTV about eating too

much poppy seeds will show positive for, I believe, a

heroin test. MTV actually had a girl test it and it did

show positive.

For the statement, "Coca-Cola and aspirin will get you

high" is false according to an article on

and David P. Mikkelson. It states that there are other,

supposedly affects, of ingesting Coca-Cola and aspirin:

it's an aphrodisiac, it's a great way to get high, it

causes instant death, and it cures headaches. These

beliefs have been around for awhile. Barbara and David

says that the belief might of originated in the 1930's

when a doctor from Illinois wrote to the Journal of the

American Medical Association to warn that teenagers were

dissolving aspirin in Coca-Cola to create an

intoxicating beverage. The article then briefly

explains the other supposed affects of taking aspirin

with Coca-Cola. Towards the end of the article, it has

a "sightings" of the belief and says that the belief of

combination of Coke and aspirin forms an intoxicant

comes up in the 1978 film "Grease".

I actually watched that episode on MTV about Urban

legends. When the girl went to get checked up for any

drug substances in her body. Her results came back

positive. Now that is really scary. I'm going to stay

far away from poppy seeds. I also heard that if you

drink soda with pop rocks then youre going to explode.

theres a lot of weird stuff going around and they only

way to know if it is true is to try it for yourself.

no...the other way to find out if they're true...is to

trick someone else into trying it...

"here, have some pop rocks, they're good" "oh, and by

the way, try drinking this...NO...its not soda...would i

do that to you?"

BOOM!!!

This just made me laugh when I read this. I have never

heard this before. I knew this had to be an urban

legend. There is no way that taking an aspirin and

washing it down with a Coke-Cola could get someone high.

Think of all the millions of people around the world

that drink Coke. Now think of all the millions of

people who take aspirin. That means there are millions

of people putting this combination into their stomachs.

Everyone around you in daily life is not high. I can

not count the number of times I have combined these two.

But I did some research. Just as I had suspected this

is not true. It was interesting how many other stories

were out there about Coke. This reminds me of the urban

legend when I was a kid. We were told that if you ate a

package of "Pop-Rocks" and drank a "Pepsi" your stomach

would blow up inside of you. We never combined these

two when I was a kid. This just sounds like another

updated for the new generation urban legend. But I did

find a lot of proof of this on the internet.

www.naplesnews.com/02/09/marco/d81179a.htm

www.snopes.com/cokelore/aspirin.asp

www.geocities.com/muslimtruth.Coca_Cola_Proof.html

This made me wonder if this is actually true. I tried

taking coke and aspirin together to see if it really

does make you high. In this experimentation I was ready

for anything. Nothing happened whatsoever? I even tried

aspirin with pepsi, nothing happened there too. I was a

little disappointed, but I just let it go. I went to

look at Heather's three sites and found out they were

not true. This is why I tried it first before looking

anything up. I had to laugh to when this bogus

information turned out to be untrue. The only thing that

I can think of that this combination might produce is a

jolt of caffiene or a development of an ulcer.

I was specifically searching for information on the

claim that the porportion of male characters on TV make

children's shows sexist. I started off by using Lycos as

my search engine. After having little to no luck I

decided to broaden my range of searching to sexism and

cartoons (I figure cartoons are the main programs

children watch). I was having a little more luck using

terms such as: cartoons sexism; tv programs sexism;

sexist tv. I decided to try the search engine MSN. MSN

was a lot easier to use. Using the same key words I was

able to acess more information pertaining to this topic.

Here are a few web sites I used in my search:

Much to my suprise I found valid information that can be

evidence to the claim that cartoons are sexist. I found

that many cartoons have no or a very limited number of

female characters on them. Ex.(A couple of my favorite

cartoons growing up) Seseame Street-Zoe Smurfs -

smurfette I found that not only are many of these

childrens programs sexist, but they are also very

stereotypical. The evidence I found against this topic

is was very limited, but there is good news for todays

children.We are now in the days of Power Puff Girls!

This cartoon demenstrates girl power (well, it's a good

place to start).There are also a number of new cartoons

that have come out in recent years that have more female

characters, but I'm not sure when or if females

characters can catch up to the male cartoon population.

although i agree that the power puff girls is a good

place to start with repairing the sexist-laden

children's shows, are we aware of how stinkin' bratty

this show is? i don't remember what study i read, but

it monitored the behavior of girls before and after a

not-completely-unrealistic amount of watching power puff

girls and documented their lowered respect for authority

and i can't remember what else, but general increased

overall abnoxiousness. although i think 'girl power'

shows are great, i wouldn't let my girls watch power

puffs cause frankly, i don't want abnoxious kids.

I was looking for television characters and sexism and

searched in msn.com under the phrase "television and

sexism". I then got several results and looked under

the link that said "Sexism and Culture". The link took

me to www.bludedojo.com/papers/sexism.

This article was called "Sexism and Culture in

Television" which stated that our culture demands for

sexism. Sexism makes the show more believable. For an

example, male characters believably exemplify strength

and endurance much more than female characters could.

Men are more qualified to play some parts than women are

for this reason.

An example the writer used was the show, Walker: Texas

Ranger. The character of the Texas Ranger had to be

played by a male character to make the "kick-butt"

scenes more believeable. Having a woman do Tae Kwan Do

and wiping out all the bad guys would not believeable.

The writer also said that to include a female character

as a hero is to change society's way of thinking. Many

times, shows flop because they try too hard to push

women to play characters of heroes. We need to slowly

do this and slowly have society adapt.

it makes sense why networks would support sexism. i'm

not saying i support this, but as far as the general

viewer, i understand the point being made. people

generally watch tv as a form of entertainment and

escapism. after a long day of work do you think Joe

Factory wants to question his ideology by watching a

superheroine save the world, or do you think he wants to

live vicariously through the hero and save HER? my

guess is the latter. cable channels like USA have made

shows like La Femme Nikita for a long time now, and

there are those incredible cheesy Xena-type shows, but

those are more sexploitation than superhero, i think. i

do think it's a good sign however, that ABC's Alias is

doing so well, with a strong female CIA lead character,

that it's likely we'll see more atypical characters in

the future.

In the matter of sexism on television, I believe that

the topics or characters on the shows put these types of

people on to attract the public to watch them. An

example of this would be the t.v. show Baywatch. Have

you ever seen any life gaurds that look as good as these

characters, no. Sexism is the number one thing that

television exploits. Sexism on television is a must as

well as a story line. Men as well as women are succumbed

to these types of exposure. Women are portrayed to be

the beautiful and erotic helpless person, and the man is

portrayed to be the tough, strong, and heroic character.

This degrades both male and female. I checked out the

site that Ly checked out which was, www.bludejojo.com,

and sure enough it shows that our culture demands this

type of out look.

I wanted to find out if there was any truth to this

rumor that I had heard previously in high school. To

search, I used Google.com. with the words: Coca Cola and

aspirin. Many, many website matches appeared. One of

them was very informative:

www.snopes.com/cokelore/aspirin.asp Basically, this

website derailed this claim as false. It listed the

four most common rumors about Coke and aspirin: 1) it is

an aphrodisiac 2) it is a good way to get high 3) it

causes instant death 4) it cures headaches This website

even documents places in which girls are taught to be

aware of their cokes and not to let some boy slip an

aspirin in their drinks or they will fall for him

instantly. This website even sites the start of these

rumors. A doctor from Illinois published an article in

the "Journal of the American Medical Association" in

1930 stating that the mixture of Coca cola and aspirin

resulting in an intoxicating high. Personally, I find

it hard to believe this rumor. However, I can see how

teenage kids would fall for any one of these rumors

based on their desire to be adult and get high.

i looked in google using women in war. i thought this

relevant due to our war with Iraq.

this is a site that has many links to it about the

history of women and the roles they play in war. The

roles of the women in the military has changed. They

used to disguise themselves so that they were able to

fight. But for most they found themselves in the role as

servicers. For example they would sew or do other

traditional women things. The times have changed but

not all that much. Women are still not allowed on the

frontlines. They are only able to fly and bring

supplies to the front lines but not fight. Should they

be able to have that option or should the role of women

in war be as they have been and support the men where

they can?

Personally I think that the claim of male

characters on television making children's programs

sexist could be true for the current generation but not

necessarily through the years of television. I can

remember when I was young watching girl shows such as

'My Little Ponies,' 'Strawberry Shortcake,' and 'Rainbow

Bright.' These shows did have male characters in them

but they were directed towards girls. On the other hand,

males of my generation recall watching such cartoons as

'Transformers,' 'G.I. Joe,' and 'HeMan,' and of course

both sexes occasionally watched eachothers chartoons.

Today there is still a division of what girls and boys

watch, but through controversy sexism is always brought

up in every cartoon which in my conclusion is inevitable

because humans are a sex and will forever be involved in

sexism.

Two interesting articles I found on the internet were

"Kids TV: A guide for the perplexed"

by Steve Sailer, and "Smurfy Sexism: Created with a

biased hand"

Mariruth Graham. Take a breif look at the articles. The

first article gives examples of different shows and the

sexims involved, and the second points out the

stereotypes of women in the well known cartoon 'The

Smurfs.' In the first article Steve Sailer brings up the

point that most Disney movies are focused towards the

female audience, which is a strong contradictory point

to for the claim of male characters making programs

sexist. However Mariruth Graham takes a look at the

classic cartoon which only contains one female and she

reports that "Smurfette's physical characteristics draw

her as a stereotype which promotes sexism because of the

prejudice messages the writers illustrate." Both

articles take a look at sexism on cartoons and have good

supporting evidence. Alltogether, I remain with the

conculsion that there will always be controversy on

sexism because we are sex.

I agree that cartoon shows have always been divided for

the sexes and will probably continue to be in the

future. While some cartoons for girls do have the girls

being heroes such as "Sailor Moon" or "Powerpuff Girls"

the shows still have the female heroes in skirts and

pastel colors, a trademark for little girls and

clothing. Other cartoons do have strong female

characters but for the most part the females tend to be

the ones who need saving or are the observers. I think

one way things may change is if there are more female

cartoonists that create strong and independent female

characters for young girls to watch. Maybe with a slow

transition of strong female characters such as the

leading female role on "Alias", we will see a move

towards female characters as leaders not followers.

I also read the Smurfette article and I agree that

sexism will never be completely eliminated in our

culture because the media, mainly television is so much

a part of our lives. T.V. reflects our culture and

culture affects T.V.

It seems that in a way sexism on television exists

because of the viewers demand for male dominated

characters who belittle and poke fun of female

characters. Viewers laugh and don't think twice about

it. Just this morning, while listening to the radio,

the dj made female sexist jokes while eveone in the back

just laughed.

Atleast now, there ae more and more shows that have

female lead characters that are intelligent and capable

of holding their own instead of waiting for a guy to

rescue them. In this way, I do think we are headed in

the right direction.

I agree on the idea that television will be involved

sexism forever. When I was a little kid, I tended to

watch cartoons that were made for boys. It's just

because I simply wanted to be a boy and those boy

characters gave me the idea of what a hero is.

In the current situation, those TV programes in which

male characters overbumber females' and actually that

has effects on children in terms of gender stereotypes.

I wonder if that's caused by the number of people who

prefer those programs, or the number of male workers

behind the scene.

Interesting research, although I strongly disagree with

the article by Steve Sailer suggesting that Disney

movies are geared primarily towards a female audience. I

personally was an avid fan of Disney movies when I was

younger, and I have many male friends that can relate.

The reason being that Disney tends to draw its female

characters as the typical supermodel, with perfect

bodily proportions and highly attractive facial

features. The animators of Disney are obviously aware of

the effect of attractive females on the male populus; to

believe otherwise would be preposterous. Insofar as the

sexism in cartoons, I do believe that there are more

male-oriented cartoons, but I suppose this occurs only

because there is a greater tendency for males to watch

cartoons than females, although I have seen no empirical

data to support this opinion.

After reading this response to the topic of sexism in

television characters, I tend to agree with the author:

sexism is inherent in human nature because of social

norms associated with a very early part of our lives.

The example about the cartoon "The Smurfs" shows this

through the use of its only female character, Smurfette.

Because she is the only female, it is easy to se the

traits the creator gives her that may be considered

sexist. In my own experience, I watched many male-based

cartoons as a child. I enjoyed "GI Joe," "HeMan," and

""Transformers" all of which are directed at young male

audiences and perpetuate the male bias that we are

talking about. I looked down on 'girlie' shows such as

"My Little Pony" and others because of the girl

targetted attitudes of the shows. This shows my bias,

and demonstrates that the creators of these cartoons

specifically made their cartoons for a certain audience,

be it male or female.

I also looked up a few things about cartoons being

sexist. The Smurfs are probably the most sexist

cartoon. I love the smurfs, but I hate sexism. When I

was a kid I did not see this cartoon as sexist. Only

now that I am an adult and look back can I see this. I

think we need to remember that it is also somewhat

appropiate. Now let me explain. Men are visually

stimulated. So how did they illustrate this in the

smurfs - smurfette. She always wore a dress, high

heels, and long following blonde hair. This is what men

like to see. Now look at how the male characters were

illustrated. Women generally do not choose a male

partner on appearance. They look a little more into the

man, his character and employment. They all had jobs

and were pretty much identified by their jobs (handy

smurf) or their personality (brainy smurf). This is

what women look for in a male partner. So even though

the smurfs were a sexist cartoon, I believe it just

mirrored our society.

I wasn't really looking for a specific aspect of this

topic. I just wanted to look at the general sites that

were offered concerning this topic.

I used AOL as my search engine and I used the search

terms: television characters, sexism. I had no problem

finding articles related to this topic.

I found an article called "The Portrayal of Women on

Television" by Paul Harper at this address:

He mentions the fact that although women and men are

about equal in the population, men outnumber women on

televison He mentions that television is sexist because

it reinforces prejudice sex-role stereotypes. These

would include the idea that women are supposed to look

very pretty, be domestic, have children and then look

after them while the man goes out to work.

Men basically have all the lead roles and are given

action-adventure roles while the majority of women are

in soap operas and situation comedies.

Hello...Just to let you know that I clicked on the link

of that article, but the the page wasn't found.

I agree that most men are the ones who portrayed in

those stereotypically masculine roles and the women are

the ones who are stereotypically portrayed in feminine

roles such as cooking, babysitting, crying over a

man...etc.

Although these sexist roles still exist, there has been

some major improvement over the years. Remember "Leave

it Beaver", "Brady Bunch", and those other corny TV

shows in which the women were just typical housewives

who subjected themselves to be the lower counterpart in

the household. Fortunately things are changing on

television and in our culture. Women on TV now can also

"beat up the bad guys" and be the heros. Thank God for

the movie "Charlie's Angels" and the TV cartoon

"Powerpuff Girls"!

Back in days women were seen as housewives. Women were

expected to stay home to take care of the children, cook

wonderful meals, and look good for their husbands.

However, we are in a different century and time. Women

are now playing different roles in our society. We are

not just housewives we are professional working women.

I agree with what you said about tv shows reinforcing

gender stereotypes. The typical scenario is a man who

works to put food on the table for his family, while his

wife stays home and cares for the kids. That is sooo old

school. But I guess we are seeing more women in the work

force in tv shows such as Ally McBeal(yikes), and also

in reality which is a step in the right direction. We

are also seeing more agressive women emerge in shows

such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Xena(double yikes).

These shows portray women as being independent and more

assertive beings, rather than weak and feeble. And

although I would personally rather watch Real TV, I'm

sure other women out there appreciate these shows that

give us more power.

This message is in response to TV characters and Sexism

posted by Katherine Gimeno.

I agree with Katherine about how she mentions that

television reinforces prejudice sex-role stereotypes.

But I feel that television programs and movies are

starting a gradual trend in the oppsite direction, with

women taking on the lead roles. Deni stated in the

previous message about how women are showing up with

leading roles in shows such as Ally McBeal, Buffy the

Vampire Slayer and Xena. In the movie Ever After,

starring Drew Barrymore, which is a creative, realistic

remake of the Cinderella Story. Danielle, played by

Drew Barrymore, is a resourceful young woman who does

not display the typical passive femine characterstics.

An example of this takes place at the end of the movie

Danielle is being held captive. But instead of the

prince coming in to save the day, Danielle escapes from

her shackles, holds a sword to her captors neck and

demands to be set free. Just when she is leaving the

castle her prince comes riding up on his horse and tells

Danielle that he came to save her. This is just one of

the many movies that are now portraying women as strong,

and resourceful. As opposed to the traditional view

that women are helpless and always in need of a man to

come and rescue them.

I agree with the writer of the original message and the

2 others that have responded so far that women are

delving into roles that would have never been open to

them before. I am optimistic that this trend will

continue, but I think it's important to put things into

perspective.

First of all, no woman could currently demand the huge

sums that Arnold Schwarzenegger, Vin Diesel, Keanu

Reeves, and the like can and do receive for the movies

they star in.

In addition, the actresses chosen to star in these "new

roles" add a troubling dimension. One of the movies

mentioned was "Charlie's Angels". Its stars (Cameron

Diaz, Drew Barrymore, and Lucy Liu) with their flawless

faces and figures, triumph over the villains with

martial arts and sexuality. This only reinforces the

constant bombardment that women and girls receive which

says that they must be stunningly beautiful in order to

succeed in life. While I see nothing wrong with them

using their sexuality to dominate their opponents, the

unnecessary overt sexuality in the movie affects girls

just as Cosmo does. I also think some of the movie's

dialogue makes them look stupid. And we musn't

forget...their boss is a man.

Another example of women breaking out of stereotypical

roles is Jennifer Garner in "Alias". I agree that it is

a groundbreaking role, but do you think she (just like

Charlie's Angels) was chosen for that role because of

her martial arts skills?

I agree wholeheartedly that the media is moving in the

right direction. But we can't be lulled into

complacence -- as far as "Alias" is from "Leave it to

Beaver" is how far things are from being equal.

I want to start off by saying that I am not a proponent

of sexism nor am I a "sexist pig" of the traditional

sense, but I am admittedly at odds with accepting

equality between male and female gender roles. The

current trend in media programming has been a wave of

so-called empowerment. While this wave is a movement

away from the social norm, the line between gender roles

still remain quite clear.

Women should be afforded every opprotunity that their

male counterparts have. There's no doubt about that.

This message isn't about women's rights and

opprotunities. My concern is gender roles, afterall

where better to learn about gender roles than T.V.? It

seems to me that women, as a whole, are not satisfied

with society's portrayal of female gender roles on

television. What then is the ultimate female gender

role? What would appease the female masses?

I hope that complete equality is not the outcome women

are looking for in gender roles. Part of the allure of

women is their differences from men, in the media as

well as in real life. To blur those differences would in

turn rob women of their inherent beauty. I don't know

maybe I am a pig afterall.

I think it's important, when looking for where and how

certain groups are exploited, to examine what does the

dominating group want? Here we're talking about women

and, while the ideal woman's profile has shifted some

since the good ol' days, her two most important

characteristics to be fulfilled remain good looks and

being subervient. Even though women may be more

empowered on television, the question remains is whether

they still must answer to a man. In terms of Buffy and

Xena and ass kicking women, they are sex objects and

they serve a purpose in that respect. They are not

leading any kind of movement of empowerment. The last

thing we should be doing is patting our patriarchy on

the back because we've evolved from "Leave It To

Beaver." With every role we observe a person in, we

need to ask ourselves if we could see the opposite sex

playing an almost identical part. It's so much deeper

than that. Pick a popular network and watch it from 8pm

to 10pm and tally up the number of times a woman was

portrayed sexually versus a man. Tally up how many

aggressive acts against women take place versus men.

Then come back to this discussion and let's go from

there.

I specifically searched for Sexism and Culture in

Television and how does culture affect sexism. I used

the search phrases 'Sexism in Television' and 'Culture

and Sexism'. I didn't encounter any problems during my

online search. I used the www.google.com as my search

engine.

In this short research, I found that not only can

culture affect television, but television can also

affect our culture. We can learn to alter our culture to

change the thinking of the people our society. The

reason why sexist shows even exist is because there

still seems to be a demand for them. Sexist shows are

dominated by male characters. There is little

improvement in the past few years with movies such as

'Charlie's Angels' and other movies that portray women

just as heroic and strong as men. There are also some

TV programs such as 'Powerpuff girls' and 'TV shows that

are incorporating females in positive lead roles that

are helping to create the equilibrium among of males and

females. Incorporating females into positive lead roles

will cause some changes in society.

We need more nonsexist TV programs and movies. We need

less of 'Howard Stern', 'Who Wants to Marry a

Millionare', and those TV shows that portray women as

being weak, battered, abused, and bored housewives.

It's the year 2003 and yet television shows and movies

still need more improvement on creating a sense of

equality among males and females.

In this research, I used the online article "Sexism and

Culture in Television" by Jim Winn. The article can be

I tried the link to the address, but it didn't work. I

agree that we need more shows the portray women in a

brighter light. I've watched "Joe Millionaire" and the

main thing that it points out is that american women are

gold diggers. Personally I think it's a funny show,

because you can tell why women are portrayed that way on

television just by watching some of the women on that

show. Another show that's out right now that does give a

woman "power" but is still sexist is "The Bachelorette".

This is american culture.

This is in response to Marissa Kuroda on Sexism and

culture in television. I agree that there is a demand

for sexism in television shows because that is what gets

to viewer interested. I really have no first hand

experiences with other cultures and what they have on

television verses what we see here in America. I wonder

is if Japan, Australia, and Germany for example have the

same amount of sexism as the America. I would guess that

because there is so much oppression in South Africa on

women that perhaps that is a reason why there are less

women in their television productions.

I think that the reason why sexist television exists is

actually quite simple. That is what sells. As sick and

perverted as it is...sexist television is what

entertains and sells. Even women seem to still watch

this sexist television, in spite of their constant

protests against it.

simple and sick equasion...yet totally real:

sexist TV = ratings = $$ for network officials

I used the yahoo search engine for the topic of tv

characters and sexism. The terms I used in my search

were sexism, children, and tv. I had no problems with

this search.

On this site the author mentions that the Public

Broadcasting System(PBS), which features children's

programming, has consistently shown substantially more

males than females on their programs. She also mentioned

something kind of disturbing that I never really noticed

before. She pointed out that the Muppets were

overwhelmingly male characters with the exception of

maybe 1 or 2 including Miss Piggy, who is voiced by a

man. Also, it isn't very comforting to know that they

made the female a fat pig. I never really liked the

Muppets anyways...but I was totally into Scooby Doo and

the Flintstones :)

This is a comment message for Deni Ramiro on

"Television characters and sexism":

I have noticed that much of children's programs are

dominated by male characters and though I was

surprised at first, I am enlightened that you pointed

out the fact that The Muppets only casted 1 or 2 female

characters and that Ms. Piggy was voiced by a man.

Besides The Muppets, I also thought of Sesame Street

and the cartoon series Winne the Pooh. Look at the more

prominent characters on the shows--Big Bird, Elmo,

Oscar the Grouch, the Count, Bert and Ernie, and the

Cookie Monster on Sesame Street; Winnie the Pooh,

Piglet, Eeyore, and Tigger--they're all males!

Although we can think of many more examples that

illustrate how sexist these programs are, we cannot

deny their popularity. (Have you noticed the different

kinds of Elmo dolls they come up with each year?) Would

it really make a difference if these shows added more

female characters? I think not; probably because they

have already established themselves and have had

reliable numbers of followers throughout the years.

But then again, these shows/characters were made at

least twenty years ago and I have begun to notice that

there are more children's shows that have females in

the limelight now. Yes, the PowerPuff girls, Kim

Possible (who has a male side-kick), Penny Proud (from

the Proud Family), Sailor Moon, etc.

There will always be evidence for children's programs

being sexist and while steps are being taken to

alleviate that, all I can wonder is, "Do kids even

care?" It's not a matter of them noticing how sexist

shows are. Afterall, I would think that these shows'

creative groups put in a lot of time and thought into

them, testing out different ideas they hope would

attract children and keep their attention for a long

time. If the children "get hooked on them," then

congratulations to the masterminds. They did their

jobs, even if the shows are sexist.

I didn't realize that PBC consistently shown more males

than females on their programs, either. How

interesting! In any case, I belive that television has

a great influence on children regarding their attitudes

toward gender roles. Television could provide

stereotyped and biased messages to children about the

gender role. As I was grew up in Japan, I remember

there were many "hero" types of Kid's TV shows. (Kikaida

is one of them) But I didn't like them because all the

heros were boy charactors.

This is a comment message to Emiko Kaylor's comment

message on "Kid's shows and sexism":

That's true! I definitely agree with you that television

has a big influence on children's attitudes toward

gender roles. Television already provides stereotyped

and biased messages to children about these roles.

Unfortunately, I don't think there will be major changes

in television soon to make children's programs less

sexist.

Society as a whole places such emphasis on the gender

roles that even if children's programs became less

sexist, family, friends, and peers would still

perpetuate gender roles.

I agree that television plays an important role in

shaping children's attitudes toward gender roles, but I

think family and school have an even greater influence

on their concept of gender roles. Say for example, if a

little boy cries, mommy will say "boys don't cry", or

his siblings might tell him "only girls cry".

Television is, most of time, reflecting what reality is,

so maybe it'll be fair to say that television is being

influenced by what real life is.

After reading your message, I thought to myself, "That's

right! The muppets did have mainly male characters!"

It is something I never noticed before. I watch a lot

of cartoons with my daughter (she's almost two, so I

regulate what she watches)and notice the ones that she

watches have mostly male characters also (Rolie Polie

Olie and Stanley on the Disney Channel). Both of the

shows have male characters as their main character. The

only other females are usually younger siblings or their

mother.

It does make me wonder why male characters are dominant

even in cartoons, because they can make the character

any way or any sex that it wants to, but it chose to

have mainly male characters. For children though, I

don't think that it has too much affect on them, but as

they are older, I am sure that they learn to identify

with the characters.

I agree strongly with you that sexism exists in our

childrens TV programs. Your right, there are few female

cartoon characters (at least compared to the amount of

male characters)! And of the few female characters, most

if not all seem to fall victim to the harsh stereotypes

that are put on women today. It's sad, but what do you

expect? We live in a world where men dominate

everything!Of course sexism has slithered its way into

the childrens TV programs, with the sole purpose of

currupting the minds of the todays youth.

I found Deni's website link very interesting. The

author, Susan D. Witt says, "Television sends forceful

and compelling messages to children about the

societally-approved roles for boys and girls and men and

women. These messages are often sterotyped, biased, and

outdated yet continue to persist and influence the

behavior of children. As children continue to develop

and grow, they are exposed to more and more of gender

biases and sterotypes and thus children perpetuate

similiar unfair attitudes and behaviors."

I think that Witt helps explain WHY there may sexism in

television. Society accepts them. I accept them. Such

sexist ideas have been past down from generation to

generation.

I also think shows about "superwomen" heros like zena,

and charlie's angels help break the typical women

profession. However, those shows are still sexist.

Zena wears tight fitted clothes and Charlies angels

actresses are young and sexy. I guess they have to do

this in order to appeal to both sexes.

The television shows for kids have powerful messages in

them. although children are not able to understand the

messages they do tend to imitate them. For example i

never noticed the number of male to male ratio. it

never crossed my mind, but if you look back on the

programming and start picking out things then you start

to see a difference. wheather people are actually

affected by these cartoons or shows we will never know.

but what we do know is that many behaviors that a child

sees on tv are imitaded and can have life long effects.

Last year I did a report on children's media and I found

that from birth children learn a significant amount of

gender typing from the media. Programs still continue

to underrepresent females, to display males and females

in stereotyped activities, and portray female's bodies

different from males.

I was specifically searching for information on the

claim that the porportion of male characters on TV make

children's shows sexist. I started off by using Lycos as

my search engine. After having little to no luck I

decided to broaden my range of searching to sexism and

cartoons (I figure cartoons are the main programs

children watch). I was having a little more luck using

terms such as: cartoons sexism; tv programs sexism;

sexist tv. I decided to try the search engine MSN. MSN

was a lot easier to use. Using the same key words I was

able to acess more information pertaining to this topic.

Here are a few web sites I used in my search:

Much to my suprise I found valid information that can be

evidence to the claim that cartoons are sexist. I found

that many cartoons have no or a very limited number of

female characters on them. Ex.(A couple of my favorite

cartoons growing up) Seseame Street-Zoe Smurfs -

smurfette I found that not only are many of these

childrens programs sexist, but they are also very

stereotypical. The evidence I found against this topic

is was very limited, but there is good news for todays

children.We are now in the days of Power Puff Girls!

This cartoon demenstrates girl power (well, it's a good

place to start).There are also a number of new cartoons

that have come out in recent years that have more female

characters, but I'm not sure when or if females

characters can catch up to the male cartoon population.

Aloha Tamara, I remember watching Seseme street all the

time when I was younger and truly enjoyed it (Grover was

my boy). I didn't realize the absence of women though,

there weren't many puppets who were girls but I do

remember a lot of the human actors being female. Big

Bird was always a mystery to me to which gender he

represented. I watched a special program the other night

which revealed some very interesting facets of Seseme

Street such as: Oscar being a grouch and everyone

treating him like he was a mean guy. He lived in a

trash can for crying out loud, anyone would be grouchy

if they lived in a trash can. It gave evidence of

underlying motives of some people concerning the

mistreatment of homeless people. He was a rather dirct

stereotype of a grumpy homeless guy.Another theory

proposed was that The Count was a pimp! Always dressed

in a suit, and continually counting(his money), that

cookie monster is a druggy, his eyes aren't cukoo just

from regular old cookies (those cookies are laced!),and

that Snuffalupagus was always stoned evidenced by his

slow and slurry speech. There were others but I can't

remember them right now. I don't know how watching that

program affected me because I'm not mean to homeless

people, not a druggy and definitly not a pimp. I think

it may have just prepared and warmed up my young mind to

the millions of sterotypical representations I will

encounter throughout the rest of my television viewing.

I will not and do not blame Snufalupagus for any habits

I may have aquired from him. He's a good guy! Bye.

I was looking for television characters and sexism and

searched in msn.com under the phrase "television and

sexism". I then got several results and looked under

the link that said "Sexism and Culture". The link took

me to www.bludedojo.com/papers/sexism.

This article was called "Sexism and Culture in

Television" which stated that our culture demands for

sexism. Sexism makes the show more believable. For an

example, male characters believably exemplify strength

and endurance much more than female characters could.

Men are more qualified to play some parts than women are

for this reason.

An example the writer used was the show, Walker: Texas

Ranger. The character of the Texas Ranger had to be

played by a male character to make the "kick-butt"

scenes more believeable. Having a woman do Tae Kwan Do

and wiping out all the bad guys would not believeable.

The writer also said that to include a female character

as a hero is to change society's way of thinking. Many

times, shows flop because they try too hard to push

women to play characters of heroes. We need to slowly

do this and slowly have society adapt.

This was an interesting post inasmuch as it comes

from a different stance than most of the others in this

category. Having looked through the other posts, it

seems clear that most people would agree television is

sexist. This would seem to suggest that progress can be

made not by filling what would be a male role with a

female, or blindly adding female parts, but rather by

looking more realisticlly at the role anyone should be

playing. That is, sexism works both ways. I liked

that the walker texas ranger example was given, though

to be fair, Chuck Norris is not, himself, particularly

believable, so would any other actress/actor do more

harm? What comes out of this post for me, though it

is not really the point, is that sexism on television,

as elsewhere, is a problem with which we need to deal,

but that it is important to do so carefully.

Reply to research message:

It is true that television tends to only make men the

hero. There are a couple of shows that have done pretty

well, for instance the shows "Xena the warrior princess"

and "Alias." Both shows have women defeating the bad

guys. Of course there is also sexism in these two shows

because the women sometimes are playing more of a sexual

figure than a hero. I'm not sure if it's discrimination

towards women, but in general, any type of show that

gives women the power and title of a hero will always

glorify her as a woman that is sexually alluring. This

is what our society expects.

a). After I searched the articles about television

characters' influence on children, I started looking for

the opposite opinion or evidence against ghe claim that

male characters on television makes children's program

sexist. Unfortunately, I could not find any research

findings or evidences that proved the opposite opinion.

However, there was the research that showed, viewing

television has the strong influence on children in terms

of gender-role as children, but not adult role.

b). TV characters influence on children, TV impact of

sexism on children, psychological impact of TV

characters, relationship: TV characters and sexism, no

impact: viewing television,

c). The problems occured when the articles mentioned the

specific cartoons, and dramas. Although, I've been here

for three years, I've not get accustomed with TV

programs here ,yet. That means, the only articles I was

motivated to read were the conclusions or results of the

surveies and researches.

d). I used "Google" and "Ask jeeves".

e).

f). Basically what I found was the facts that those TV

programs creat sex/gender role streotyping and TV

characters are overnumbered by men. I found the

interesting graphs as follows.

Gender representation of sport articles in the "The

Times" .

the number of articles Percent(%) of total Men

2632 88.5 Women 291

10.9 Mixed 15 0.6

I used MSN.com again to find information on television

characters and sexism. The phrase used was television

characters and sexist children programs. The website is:

The author Susan Witt in "The influence of television on

children's gender role socialization," states that since

the 1950's, about two thirds of the characters on

television programs are male. And also that children's

programs on PBS showed fewer females than males.

The article also states that sexism is even among the

Muppets, because most of the muppet characters have male

names or male voices.

I used Yahoo to help with my search and when I typed in

'gender roles' for another topic, I was given so many

sites that some of them ended up working for this

discussion as well. Www.apa.org/releases/cartoon.html

is an interesting site because it shows stark statistics

in today's programming with a sexist agenda geared

toward children. While the percentage of female cartoon

characters may have increased slightly, their 'station'

really has not changed. They are still the nurtures and

the men are still the violent warriors. Not only is

this detrimental for young girls, teaching such traits

as co-dependance in lieu of self-reliance, but it only

furthers the the already rampant violent nature in

television and all the dangers which accompanies it. If

the nature of stereotypical programming has changed so

little over the past twenty years (of the past forty

years which have been critical in the civil right

movement), it seems like wasted energy to expect any

difference in programming for our children to come. I

was not actually looking to find proof of children's

stereotypes when I began this search, but with what I

have read, and being that childrens' minds are the most

influential, then it's easy to believe that similar

predispositions filter through adult-aimed airwaves.

I agree that male cartoon characters are usually

portrayed as the more violent characters and the females

are the nurturers. Even if the females are portrayed

as superheroes, their sex appeal is maximized. I think

that children receive these messages and try to act in

the same ways. Little boys and girls definitely have

gender roles and play behavior from a young age, which

is probably highly influenced by the television they

watch. The future of these children is concerning

when females learn to be dependent on males from the

stereotypes they see on television.

i believe that roles in television play a big role in

how children develop. The visions we see on tv give an

example of the values that our society has. We see

women as care givers and men as violent warriors. until

we change how society views women and men in general i

foresee no changes in the programming of tv shows for

children.

For this research topic I was interested in finding out

what influence the dominance of male characters has on

the development of children. I used MSN with the search

terms "male characters on television". I came up with

the following sites:

www2.lewisu.edu/~gazianjo/influence_of_television_on_child.htm

and

www.ifrance.com/sociomedia/THE%20INFLUENCE%20OF%20TELEVISION%20ON%20CH.

The search itself went well and basically what I found

was what one might guess about male characters on

television. For one, they make up the majority of

television programming. And two, women's roles are

defined by their relationships with men. It was that

second finding that I found profound. One of the web

sites actually broke down the average hours spent by

children in front of the tv and how that related to the

male and female stereotypes they learn.

For this week's topic I focused on how sexist jokes

might affect men and women. I used MSN with the search

phrase "sexist jokes" which produced an endless list of

joke sites. I then tried "sexist jokes and men" which

produced much of the same. Third time was a charm though

with the phrase "sexist jokes towards women". I found an

article called "An Analysis of Sexist Humor" at the

following website:

newmedia.cgu.edu/comedy/projects/teitgesera/stfinal.htm

This article attempts to give reasons why either men or

women might find humor in jokes that degrade the

opposite sex. It did it in an interesting way though.

The author actually gave examples of several sexist

jokes interjected with literature on it's possible

causes and effects.

The topic I was looking for was culture and television.

I used the yahoo.com search engine I had no problems

finding this site. The phrases I used was sexism in

The things I learned from this article was that

television and our culture are directly linked. These

are two things that go hand in hand. Television

influences the values of our society and the values of

society are shown to us through the television. The

values of our society are evident through the media and

television shows. Our society is a male dominated

culture in which females are trying to make a name for

themselves. This is evident through the television

shows as we see more women on t.v. that are playing

stronger roles. Although they are no where they should

be time is changing and with it is our culture and

television programming.

I liked the article you've chosen. It completely

explains how our society influcences teleivsion. I

agree with you that television and culture go hand in

hand. It's interesting to see that there are more shows

with stronger women, but I still think there needs to

more. Many shows that are male dominated portray women

as helpless and needy. They should put strong female

characters in these shows so it can seem more realistic.

I also agree with you that as society changes our

television shows will also change.

The topic I was looking for was culture and television.

I used the yahoo.com search engine I had no problems

finding this site. The phrases I used was sexism in

The things I learned from this article was that

television and our culture are directly linked. These

are two things that go hand in hand. Television

influences the values of our society and the values of

society are shown to us through the television. Our

culture as many others is male dominated and we see that

in our programming. As our society changes where women

are becoming stronger and stronger and we see this as

roles in comedy shows. The women are no where near

balanced but they are letting themselves be known and

society, culture and television programming will change

with time.

I found your posting interesting as well as sadly true.

What can we really expect from T.V.? We live in a male

dominated culture that views woman as sex objects, and

our TV programming is a direct reflectoin of it. Sad but

true.

I think that it is really good that women are becoming

more stronger in television programs. Women need to

have a stronger role these days because television

really influences are children and society. Children

should learn that women and men are both equal and

capable of fufilling the same role, therefore, the media

should recognize women as also having a superior and

more powerful role.

For this research I was searching for anything that had

to do with television characters and sexism. The search

terms I used was television and sexism. I did not have

any problems with this search because there were a lot

of information on this topic. The search engine that I

used to find my information was google. The web address

for the site I found is:

In this article I found that the media has a lot of

gender typing. Television programs still continue to

underrepresent females and to display males and females

in stereotyped activities. Current television programs

have more leading characters played by males than

females. I am appaled after reading this article. I

feel that the media reflects how women are displayed in

reality: they are often dominated by men and given

different expectations. Even though women today have

professional careers, they are still steretyped to play

the role as housewife and caregiver. The media also

reflects how women are seen to be more superficial than

intelligent. In the media and reality a woman's

appearance and beauty seems to be more important than

their intelligence, which then begins to affect their

self-image.

Once again I had to default my attempts to use other

search engines and again utilized ol'faithful Yahoo.com.

I wanted to find feminists points of view so the search

words I used were: television, sexism, representation,

and feminist. There were plenty of articles but the ones

I picked are listed below:

www.frontpagemag.com/articles/printable.asp?ID=119

www.aber.ac.uk/media/students/pth9601.html

I have been aware of stereotypical representation of

gender roles portrayed on television so it was no

surprise being told this by both websites. There were

intersting factoids which did enlighten my comprehension

such as: the number of women working behind the scenes

is greatly misrepresented by those who work on it, that

only 6.2% of film directors last year were women, on

primetime tv women account for 28% of the roles, they

get only 38% of screen actor guild roles and that there

is a drastic decline of women acting beyond their

forties. This is all detailed in the first website along

with some positive trends such as: the chairperson of

Universal Pictures and the CEO of Paramount Pictures are

both women and other powerful positions are held by

women at ABC, CBS, FOX and UPN. It seems as if women are

well represented behind the sceens but not well

on-screen.The second website just offered an essay on

the representation of stereotypical gender roles on

television. It gave evidence such as the representation

of women as being emotional, fearful and compassionate

while male actors were told to be strong, hard working

and aggressive. It is my contention that these

characteristics are such common attributes given to

actors throughout the years that it has gone virtually

unnoticed to the common television viewer through

habituation, so that when a role comes up which defies

these traditional gender roles people quickly notice. I

also feel that these representations are so widely

accepted because of biological as well as envirornmental

influences. Men are strong and bring home the bread

while women are supportive and loving and are the reward

which makes the man's life worth living. These values

are instilled at a young age and have been for many

generations.

I remember growing up and watching smurfs as one of my

favorite morning shows. I never really thought about

smurfette as some sex symbol, but I'll admit that when I

grew older and would chance upon the show I would think

that smurfette must really get it, being the only female

in a mushroom village of males.

I think cartoons back in the day had more of a

wholesome story line to it; in cartoons for today's

generation its all about explosions and kung-fu

fighting, minus the plot. This lack of story line does

more damage to the budding mind than a little blue chick.

I figure that every person has their own opinion

about this topic, if they've taken the time to think

about it. But, I decided to search for opinions in the

academic field about the role that the female has in

today's television. I typed in gender role + television

in Google.

In the American Psychology Association's website,

www.apa.org/releases/cartoon/html, the article talked

about the majority of male characters who all held some

type of powerful, prestigious position in the story

line; while the few female characters were subserviate

helpers.

I found some information worth noting in the

American Academy of Pediatrics website,

www.aap.org/advocacy/ sign298.htm. This long article

stated that the few women who get a strong role in a

show, usually are portrayed as the invincible type.

Also, that as people and especially children watch more

and more television gender role stereotype behavior will

increase.

I'm not sure of my statistics, but I remember boys

being more into television and cartoons than girls were;

even during our generation' childhood,when there were a

lot of cartoons and shows directed toward the female

audience. I think it's just that the television has to

target the largest audience. If males are watching more

t.v. than girls, which seems obvious because of the male

orientation of television, than girls are going to take

a back seat to the hero's of the story.

I was interested to see if male characters still

dominated the television programs or if female

characters have changed in any way. I search using

Yahoo, under the media section. I tried using Google

first, but I just didn?t like the outcomes. Using

Yahoo, I had no major problems, only for that fact that

I had to look for a good website. I used the phrase ?TV

and gender roles.

The website that was good and one that I could agree

with was

maskin.bxscience.edu/tat/50s/50swomencurrent.html. The

author says how slowly over the years, the negative

representations of women have slowly been developing.

From a stereotyped women of being in a domestic setting,

the ?heroine? of the home, whose only ambition was to be

a good mother and dutiful wife, made a transition to

women being intelligent, independent, and self-reliant

to solve problems. Some movies that show these new

characteristics are ?Charlie?s Angels?, ?Ally McBeal?,

and ?Murphy Brown?.

There's alot of movies that depicted women with having

the same attributes as men, and that's how it should be.

My thoughts about gender roles and how they have

changed.

The biggest event that changed American women's lives

was WWII. During WWII, women were invited to work

outside of home, otherwise "forbidden". Many of these

women were called to help with the developments of war

because many men were enlisted in the service

(machinery, factory labor, welding) all jobs, that men

only performed before the war.

After the war ended, women were expected to go back to

being the housewife and mother. But often this was not

the case.

Women were seeking equal rights and liberation which was

slowly entering the hearts of all americans homes.

The main question that I want to raise is that with the

new freedoms and rights of women and the rise of mothers

entering the workforce, do you think it is better that

mother's work? Don't you think that mother's should

stay home and take care of the kids rather then relying

on babysitters and so on?

The search engine I used was MSN. First the key words I

used were: television and sexism to find an article that

supported this view. The site I found was:

that television affects culture and culture affects

television because they have both become intertwined. I

thought an interesting view on why there is sexism on TV

was "sexism exists on television only because it exists

in our culture." I think this article had many valid

points such as there is sexism because many viewers want

to see sex on TV. An interesting way to eliminate or

lessen sexism on TV suggested by the author is to

incorporate strong females in shows. I found a humorous

article in support that Bugs Bunny is not a sexist

character. I used MNS, search words Television is not

sexist. The address is:

A Canadian woman was upset over an episode where bugs

bunny escapes a witch with magic powder and walks off

into the sunset with a beautiful female rabbit and he

comments, "Ah sure, I know! But aren't they all witches

inside?'' The Canadian Broadcasting Standards Council

had rejected her complaint and request to apologize to

all female viewers. Saying that the female character

was actually portrayed in a "strong light."

After researching this extensively for my bibliography

report I have a few questions. I thought b/c our

society is in the 21st century I was not going to find a

big difference. Wow - was I wrong. I thought for sure

that the kiddie cartoons would be less sexist. Boy was

I wrong. I found that the proportion of male characters

outnumbers the female characters by 4:1 ratio. This

comes from a website that is from the APA. Check it

When I was a kid we watched the Smurfs. Now looking

back at this cartoon, it is probably more sexist than

any other cartoon. In smurfville, there is only 1

female, named smurfette. All the other male charcters

are label with a job in their title like: brainy smurf,

handy smurf, papa smurf and jokey smurf. And she always

is wearing a dress and high heels with blonde hair. Now

if that is not the typical man's dream image of a woman

I do not know what is. I found 2 seperate articles on

this.

This website stated that since the 1980's cartoonists

have been trying to draw characters as genderless as

possible,

In my search I used google as my search engine. This

search was a little more difficult. I played a lot with

the terms; sexist, cartoon characters, male cartoon

characters, and female cartoon characters. When I used

the terms female and male cartoon characters I got the

results I was looking for.

It is true that the smurf's contain a high level of

sexism within the show but then again look at all of the

cartoons that were made in the 60's and 70's. Scooby

Doo for example is a prime candidate for this

discussion. Notice how whenever anything goes wrong

that it is always Fred who has to make the courageous

rescue or that when something else goes wrong and

someone needs to be rescued that it is always one of the

girls who is in distress. This is a reinforcement that

girls should always be the damsell in distress and that

they have no means of powering themselves through the

situation. It is also true that the number of male

characters on the show do ration at 4 to 1 and even

someimes more than that. The thing that is most

disturbing about these staticstics is that these

programs provide a sexist view through the actions and

relations of the characters, incorporated with the gross

ratios. Since we are now in an age that promotes

equality between the sexes, it is inevitable that we

find discrepencies throught everything we obsevrve. But

the shocking thing is the prevelance at which these

infraction occur. Only in shows whos direct content was

meant not for the show to offend will not, because

almost all of these shows carry with them some form of

societal meaning at the time in which they were made.

This means the only way to solve this is to get rid of

all of the shows we watch now and create new, PC,

television programing.

i agree that when looking back on television shows that

we used to love we see things in a different light. Its

funny how we do not become aware of things until we get

much older. It teaches us a good lesson of how we thing

of things now and how will we see these things when we

look back on them in 10 years.

My focus was to see if there is sexism in children's

programs due to the domination of male characters. I

used the same search engine for both articles

children's programs; for both articles. No problems

occured, and I got results right away.

I found a paper written about how television is thought

to influence gender roles for children. It discusses

how even a show such as the Muppets displays sexism by

using all male voices for the characters. The paper

also found that Saturday morning cartoons had more males

in the shows and they played most of the lead roles.

But it states that boys are given precendence over girls

because boys make up 53% of the Saturday viewing

audience.

Another article I found was a contrast to the first. It

seems like a review for Katha Pollitt's essay on "The

Smurfette Principle," which is about a bunch of males

with only one female. Pollitt disagrees with children's

television shows because of sexism. The review goes on

to say that Pollitt doesn't have any evidence or

statistics as to why "kids pick up on the sexism in the

children's culture." Another thing the review states is

that Pollitt doesn't want to end sexism in children's

programs, but instead wants to promote female dominance.

The articles both show different sides to the conflict

and pose good reasons to support either, so you be the

judge.

in our society the sexist roles are taught to us at a

you ng age. Television influences the values of our

society and the values of society are shown to us

through the television. Thevalues of our society are

evident through the media and television shows. Our

society is a male dominated culture in which females are

trying to make a name for themselves. This is evident

through the television shows as we see more women on

t.v. that are playing stronger roles. Although they are

no where they should be time is changing and with it is

our culture and television programming.

I looked up sexist television characters on

www.yahoo.com. I found an article at this website:

talks about a connection between our culture and sexism

on television and how there is a demand for sexist

television shows. There are books that can be

referenced that give more information on the topic. It

also talks about how males are mostly portrayed as the

heroes in children?s television and females are the ones

that need to be saved. It goes on to say that more

studies need to be done to say for sure that these

sexist television programs are affecting children. This

could be done through cross-cultural studies. This

article shows both sides of the argument. Sexist

television shows may be affecting children, but on the

other hand, men are genetically different which may be

why they are portrayed as the stronger sex, more capable

of being the ones to ?save? others or the world in the

television shows. The other good article I found is at

This mainly has to do with commercials, but also brings

up good points on the subject.

using the terms tv sexism i found a site on google

explaining about current issues in television sexism and

its depiction of male and female roles.

The article is looking at a television station in canada

called bbc2. its trying to show how women in television

are pushed in the backgrounds and given roles that show

off traditional female roles. This causes a problem in

societies because it doesnt get the traditional

perception out of the heads of the countries youth. If

each generation keeps making the mistakes of the past

then nothing will ever change. The traditional roles

are sold to us on television then we expect these things

out of woman as the norm. Is there a way to change?

sure by redefining the role of woman to encompass more

skills and abilities and not portray them as housewives

who love nothing better than to cook and clean.

I researched what the possible effects of having a

disproportionatly large amount of male characters on TV.

I used Msn and Google, Google provided me with one more

response than Msn.

I first searched for "male television characters", but

this did not give me responsed that I desired, so I

added sexism, and "Male television characters"+sexism

produced better results.

The site:

summary of a television show and the messages it

conveyed, including sexism. The second site

I found was an article discussing a study on TV

characters, male and female, and the effect of

characters on the audience.

The males and the females on the first show analyzed

both held sterotypical roles; even when the female was

supposedly a superhero character the male usually

stepped in to help or take credit. This show could lead

children to falsely conclude that women always need a

mans help in certain areas. The study from the second

site said that "...older children and young adolescents

spend almost 25% of their awake time watching

television" The fact that so much of this age groups

time is spent watching TV is a good indicator that much

of what the younger age groups beleive about the world,

and men and women is based on what the TV decided to

show them. The study reveals that "...relatively few

prime-time TV characters were overweight (12%) and

under-represented the proportion of overweight

individuals in the general population...", which

certainly leads many young girls to percieve their own

body image as unnacptable; they "need" to be like the

girls they see on TV.

while looking for this topic, i stumbled accross this

it is of the NOW (National Organization for Women). it

details the major primetime tv networks and how they

help, or don't help, the cause of equal rights and non

sexist (feminine) tv shows.

this may be my own synical view, but i just find it

funny that there are people out there who devote their

entire days to watching TV (okay, maybe just their

entire nights, since it was primetime) to make sure that

the shows are not sexist, and that they address female

views as well. i repeat, people...ITS ENTERTAINMENT!!!

have we gotten so self serving that we forget to step

back and look at what teh real purpose is? forcing tv

networks to create shows that are pleasing to

"feminists" but end up bombing on the "ratings" is

rediculous. i agree that we need to be conscious of TV

content and make sure it is non-offensive, and

representative of actual people. HOWEVER...we also need

to realize that if it isn't entertaining, or informative

in the case of the news, it shouldn't belong on

TV...plain and simple.

RELAX!!!

I did my search today on the topic of television

charcters and sexism. I used Google and found no

problems at all. The key words that I used were

"television characters and sexism". I instantly found a

web site that helped:

written by Jim Winn and was entitled "Sexism and Culture

in Television". The paper was very interesting in that

it noted the symbiotic relationship between culture and

television. The reason that television characters and

programs are sexist is that our culture creates the need

for these programs and characters. However, television

also affects our views on sexism and, therefore can

alter our perceptions. Thus, both television and

culture contribute to the prolongation of sexism in our

society. Winn also gives examples of two television

programs with different lead characters. "Walker, Texas

Ranger" is the first show with a male lead character

(Chuck Norris). The author uses this show as an example

of why our culture demands sexist programs. Our public

would not believe a female lead character that beats up

all the bad guys like Chuckl Norris. The second show

features a female lead character--Katherine Janeway. It

is entitled "Star Trek: Voyager". Winn uses this show

as an example of how we can help to change our culture's

perspectives on sexism. By featuring more female lead

characters on television, we can help to change our

sexist society.

A. Today I searched for new information about sexism in

advertising to add into my bibliography report.

B. The phases I used: sexism and advertising, sex in

ads, sexism

C. While I was searching for this topic, I found it

very difficult to find information to argue the other

side. Most of the information I've been reading only

argues one side: that sexism in ads can cause distorted

ideas about how a person should look.

D. The search engine I used was: Skworm.com I don't

care to use this search engine but I thought I may help

me find something new :)

E. The web address of one article I read:

www.personal.kent.edu/~glhanson/readings/advertising/womeninads.htm

F. One of the interesting things that I found while I

was reading this article titled, "sexism and sexuality

in advertising" By Michael F. Jacobsen and Laurie Anne

Mazur was that it gives a historical perspective of how

the ideas of an ideal women's body has changed within 80

years (1920-2003). I found this to be very useful

because it allows the readers to understand that "thin

was not in" which seems to be the ideal body type now.

However, no matter what year it is, apperance means a

lot in advertising.

Here are some of the quotes that I found in this article

to be beneficial for my bibliography report:

1. "many products are pitched with explicit sexual

imagery that borders on pornography.. such ideas of

women reinforces stereotypes of women as sex objects and

may contribute to violence against women.

2. "Everywhere we turn, advertisments tell us what it

means to be a desirable man or women"

Overall, I think this is an excellent webpage because it

allows the readers to get a sense how cultures and ideas

may change over short periods of time. Plus, I think

people often mistake life right now is and was the same

20 years ago.

I used the searching terms, "Gender ROle." I had no

problem finding the following site with Google searching

engine.

This article written by Dr.Signorielli explains various

issues about the gender-role stereotypes on TV. For

instance, the image of women on TV are that of under

representative. The number of women and men characters

is uneven for paticular TV shows. Moreover, women are

likely to be younger than men on TV. TV can be a

positive force in a young children's life, but only if

that child is media-literate.

To add to my bibliography report I searched for new

information about sexism and advertising.

typing in the phrase: sexism and advertising.

I enjoy using this search engine because it's easy and

it rewords the phrases you type in. For example, when I

typed in the word sexism and advertising, it came up

with new phrases such as problems with advertising. I

would highly recommend using this search engine. Plus,

I didn't encounter any problems while I was using this

search engine.

Here are some of the websites pertaining to this issue.

website provides contact information of brand names like

BEBE and DIOR. The purpose is to get people to write

and complain about their sexist advertisments.

2.

This article dealt with Windson Smith shoes and his

sexist advertisments. Apparently, one of his ads was

considered distastful. And the Advertising Standard

Board (ABS) also found it to be distasteful so they had

one particular billboard taken down.

Childrens cartoons are daily supplement growing up in

America and around the world. One of the most popular

cartoons of my generation was the smurf. The idea of the

cartoon was simple a bunch of small blue people with

different personalities live together and face off

against the evil gargamel. Back then no one came to take

a look at what messages we were sending our children.

All the characters in the smurfs are men, except for

Smurfette who wore high heel shoes and a dress. The drew

the character to look very sexy. Other shows like He-man

and Gi-joe draw sexist barriers on how men and women

should act and behave. That is what can be seen as the

problems with these types of shows. It portrays men as

the aggresores and women as submissive and incapable of

taking care of them selves. Men also wore tight fitting

clothes and and women skimpy outfits. As a kid this has

a strong effect on out gender roles, and has the

possibility to inhibit men and women for stepping

outside of those means.

I searched in Yahoo using the phrase 'commercials during

cartoons' to find websites. I didn't really have a

specific topic in mind, but I figured that since

cartoons are pretty sexist (as I found in my TV-sexism

forum research), their commercial promoters would

probably be plugging pretty sexist toys. Pink and

pretty for the girls, dark and destructive for the boys.

And this proved true.

Two good, but very different, websites I found were

www.danielscablevision.com/pages/60tips.html and

www.geocities.com/carnival_isha/commercials.htm.

The first website lists a bunch of tips on how to

monitor your children's viewing by limiting their TV

time daily and interacting with them while they watch

TV. This helps proper absorption of fact rather than

fiction since oftentimes young children cannot decipher

for themselves and thus commercials that boast of

products with amazing abilities will have children

believing in no time. This also helps the parent

because do you want your child whining for a new toy

after they've been brainwashed? Probably not.

The second site is even more interesting because it has

bizarre facts such as 'American children see 20,000

commercials during their childhood.' It also mentions

the dangers of such stereotypes and expectations

children can form.

I personally, just don't think it's healthy to sacrifice

our children's minds to this mass-consumerism society.

Would kids clamor after so many brightly colored new

toys or junk food if they didn't see it on TV all the

time? Yeah, probably somewhat cause it's all around us.

But when I'm a parent, I'll want my kids to think for

themselves, not for Fisher-Price.

P.S. I had no trouble researching this topic.

I totally agree with Christina. I searched through the

search engine of yahoo and tried different ways of

finding information on coomercials during cartoons.

Commercials during cartoons, commercial brainwashing,

children's television, as well as a few others. I found

that without commercials advertising persuasive ways of

getting people to buy things, people would probably be

healthier and more in shape. Television is a main

source of corruption in our society. Children are very

subseptible to commercials and what they advertise.

They are subdued to violence, sex, and even to diseases

such as obesity and anerexia. In my opinion, this is why

children are beginning to learn adult subjects earlier

and earlier, such as the topic of sex. I also have found

that if there were no commercials during children's

cartoons, kids would not be subdued to toy advertising

and candy advertising. Without these commercials kids

would probably be much amarter and healthier. Parents

must be strongly cautioned towards what there children

watch on television. Parents should accompany there

child when watching television and explain to them

things that they might not understand. Parents also

should limit there child to an hour a day of television.

Television is one of the most influential things in

society to our children. We must monitor what our

children can and cannot watch. Everything you see in

commercials is directed to a certain sex and age group.

Commercials for children is seen as boys like cars as

well as girls like dolls. It is a part of our society.

Society chows us something and we, especially children,

think it is right.

I agree that commercials advertising sexist toys do have

their downside, but we should be looking to other

sources to blame for the development of children's

attitudes also. I know that when I go shopping for my

five year old nephew I tend to buy toys that I would

have wanted to play with as a kid, regardless of the

advertising dollars spent on it's commercials. So

really I'm to blame for imposing my inclination towards

certain toys, sexist or not. In fact the last toy I

bought for him was a kick-ass remote controlled monster

truck which I play with more frequently than he.

Whether or not my liking for sexist toys was learned

from sexist commercials as a kid I'm not sure. I do

know that I expect my nephew to feel the same towards

the toys I buy for him and react negatively when he

doesn't.

good call. that's typical of me too. and thus the

cycle of sexism repeats itself.

You know, I think thats interesting that you brought

that up. I never thought about that. My father did

that to me when I was little, and still does (just not

with toys).

I remember as a 5yr old (I'm an only child)...my dad

bought a Laser Tag set (one gun, and one vest)...and

guess who got to wear the vest...ME!! He'd chase me

around the house with the gun, and I'd have the vest

on...and I'd wonder to myself who the set was for, him

or me.

He still does it too, he'll buy things for my car that

he'd like to put in his, but realizes that "tricking

out" his truck is a lot less fun that my sporty little

car.

I agree with Miss Larson...good call!

you know...i do know one example of what you said.

whether children would still beg for toys if they didn't

watch TV.

a child that i work with (i work with elementary

children at an afterschool/daycare/japanese language

school thing) is not allowed to watch television at

home, with the exception of educational TV...history

channel, discovery, etc.

however...i still hear him screaming for the newest rage

toy, or game or whatever...its amazing. the children

around him are enough of an influence that he still

falls victim to the mass-media produced

"brainwashing"...damn they're good!!

I couldn't agree more. Concerning the first point on

monitoring children's viewing habits, it is becoming

incresingly important: kids are watching TV more than

ever, and TV is an all too easy way to entertain a child

while the overworked parent gets a break. Limiting

viewing time is essential. More sex and violence is

being marketed to kids than ever before. If something

inappropriate does come on while a child is watching, it

isn't necessarily bad if there is a responsible adult

there to discuss it with them if they have any

questions, or to set them straight if it's deemed a bad

influence. It gives the child and adult an opportunity

to discuss things that might not otherwise come up.

Now to the second point. Commercials (and cartoons

themselves) absolutely support gender stereotypes.

However, I think the advertisements children are exposed

to as adolescents are far more harmful than the ones

seen during early childhood. But perhaps this is where

the seeds are planted. The amount of commercials during

all TV programming is necessary for our digustingly

over-consumptive society. Kids are taught at a young

age that more is better, that possessions bring

happiness, and that unnecessary luxuries are indeed

necessary. This is what keeps the cycle going, and

parents feed the leviathon because they were raised the

same way.

I agree that parents should take it into their own hands

to monitor what their kids are watching. They should

also be there to discuss with them anything that doesn't

seem right on T.V. T.V. has been used as a baby-sitter

for kids and parents wonder why they may have behavior

problems. I don't think that T.V. is all to blaim for

children's gender preferences in toys. Boys are not

encouraged to play with girl toys and girls are not

encouraged to play with boy toys. They acquire these

gender differences from their parents as well as society

and T.V.

It is completly up to parents to monitor the television

viewing habit of their children, but in the end if you

allow your child to watch tv, they will see

advertisments directed towards them. Advertisments

which are a result of our culture, and that cannot be

avoided. The gender difference encontered from watching

television are also unavoidable, but what can you do.

Things are what they are because they are a certain way.

And that is the reason that people like things. If you

didn't agree with the catholic church on the way that

they handled the sex scandal, you could boycott the

church. But so much depends on the media, primarily

television, that at some time you are dgoing to have to

revert back to it, and when you do it will be the same

as it was when you boycotted it. It will always be a

lose-lose situation when you deal with it. The trick is

how long can you not deal with it?

I agree that it is not healthy to sacrifice our

children's minds to the mass consumerism of this

society, but these days everyone is so busy. My cousin

constantly buys his daughter anything to keep her

occupied. He found that as long as he has a Barney tape

going or some kind of cartoon going, she will usually

just sit there and keep quiet. It's funny because to me

it looks like he tries to use the TV media as a

babysitter, so that he can work on his business. He

even put a TV and DVD player in all his cars just so

that she can watch her shows while on the road.

I looked for the reviews of the movie, Princess

Mononoke. I was simply curious about the interpretation

of the main character in the movie through people who

saw it as some sort of idealized model of woman in

Japan.

I used the title of the mo