Re: Mmm, Bathwater

1

ha

horizontal rule
2

We can get to 1000 with this one, I'm sure of it.

horizontal rule
3

How sure?

horizontal rule
4

I think ac convinced me on this point (or a very closely related one) about three arguments back. I'm not sure why you think the etiology (yes, I had to look it up) of this characteristic is relevant, unless you believe the etiology operates at the level of the individual: there must be someone in the weaker position, or we will (as a culture) lose this ability. (I'm not sure about this specific ability, but while ac has convinced me of her larger point, I still wonder if there is, as a mechanical matter, space for the characteristics she wants to preserve.)

I'm not positive, but from what I've seen, I don't think this trait is "coded" as peculiarly feminine in Iranian culture.

I never thought of it as particularly female, either. OTOH, you do come off as nutless. Isn't this a Hegelian idea about the master and the slave? (This is barely remembered from an Intro to PoliSci class.)

horizontal rule
5

3: I used "can" rather than "will" on purpose. Statements about potentiality are difficult to falsify.

horizontal rule
6

Given that the threads have been breaking down lately once they get to 800 or so, I remain skeptical.

horizontal rule
7

Okay, fine, it's not going to reach 1000 comments -- cowards.

horizontal rule
8

Have the courage of your convictions, Adam. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you're wrong.

You know what would be awesome? If we bickered for 1000 comments over whether this thread could make it to 1000.

horizontal rule
9

That would not be awesome.

horizontal rule
10

It would be more awesome than the more likely way of reaching 1000 comments.

horizontal rule
11

Would not.

horizontal rule
12

The more you argue, the closer we get to 1000.

horizontal rule
13

Totally would.

horizontal rule
14

Wait. Are we arguing or bickering here?

horizontal rule
15

Is there a difference?

horizontal rule
16

What kind of question is that?

horizontal rule
17

A rhetorical one.

horizontal rule
18

Rhetorical questions are such an annoying argumentative strategy.

horizontal rule
19

Are not.

horizontal rule
20

Aren't they? Could anything be more annoying?

horizontal rule
21

So what kind of question was 14?

horizontal rule
22

I'll ask the questions here, you're the one that started this fight.

horizontal rule
23

So ask.

horizontal rule
24

I did, and you didn't give me a straight answer. So typical of the left-leaning commentariat.

horizontal rule
25

Is not.

horizontal rule
26

Adam and I were bickering, eb and I were arguing. This may not be meaningful, but it makes my previous comments consistent. Happy?

horizontal rule
27

I'm tired of this motherfucking bickering on this motherfucking thread!

horizontal rule
28

Oh now, there's an argument.

horizontal rule
29

Is too.

horizontal rule
30

Is not infinity!

horizontal rule
31

26: No, I am most certainly not happy. Don't take that tone with me.

horizontal rule
32

Is too infinity + 1!

horizontal rule
33

Apparently I am the only one thinking at a grade-school level. I'll go back to reading about Renaissance humanism now.

horizontal rule
34

31: Eep.

horizontal rule
35

EB, go to your room.

horizontal rule
36

E?

horizontal rule
37

35 was me.

horizontal rule
38

36 is not a rhetorical question.

horizontal rule
39

Typo.

horizontal rule
40

33: Damn, I was hoping you'd take this thread to 1000 all by yourself.

horizontal rule
41

Infinity + 1 is just infinity. It's some kind of math thing -- when a bigger infinity is added to a smaller infinity or a finite number, the bigger infinity just absorbs it, kind of like the Borg Collective of the Liberal Hive-Mind.

horizontal rule
42

So, y'all notice that ac's post was good?

horizontal rule
43

Was too.

horizontal rule
44

I object to Ogged trying to inject substance into the thread.

horizontal rule
45

Ogged's just trying to hit on ac by pretending to be interested in, you know, her thoughts.

horizontal rule
46

The post is interesting, although I can't somehow figure out what it would mean to lose the sort of sensitivity ac is talking about. I get valuing it, I'm just not getting to seeing it as threatened.

horizontal rule
47

4: What if each person considered all other persons to be superior? Then the same attitude would exist, without the present system being in place and without being tied to a particular gender.

Whether a situation like I describe can be brought about on a practical level is irrelevant.

horizontal rule
48

This bit from something I'm editing totally reminded me of the Unfoggedtariat:

"the number of roosters vying for 'top cock' seems to crow not only all day long but also throughout the night in some places."

horizontal rule
49

That's one confusingly written sentence.

horizontal rule
50

48: Wait, is that supposed to be "seem to crow" or "seems to grow"?

horizontal rule
51

"Crow." You can see why it needs major editing.

horizontal rule
52

Ogged's just trying to hit on ac by pretending to be interested in, you know, her thoughts.

Wait, is ac hot? Is it too late now to say the post was good? Damn.

horizontal rule
53

Infinity + 1 is just infinity. It's some kind of math thing

Ok, here's how we can get to 1000 posts easy:

Actually, it depends on whether you're talking about cardinality or ordinality. Actually, for a standard definition of aleph-null infinity in mathematics (a lower case omega, I believe, it's the one that looks like a curvy w), 1+infinity = infinity, but infinity + 1 is different from either.

It's a mapping issue if you're dealing with ordinals.

And now the ensuing comments could take us to 1000.

horizontal rule
54

That is, if anyone gives a shit about theoretical math.

And sorry for overusing "actually".

horizontal rule
55

If you were to add a few words about the distinction between the transfinite numbers and infinity, that would be one step closer to 1000. And then if someone commented that they don't give a shit about theoretical math, that would be another.

horizontal rule
56

Ogged's just trying to hit on ac by pretending to be interested in, you know, her thoughts.

What do you think he's been doing to you the last two years?

horizontal rule
57

I don't give a shit about theoretical math. We were doing just fine bickering until Ogged had to go step in and get all snotty about us staying on topic.

horizontal rule
58

56: Me? I think Ogged's about the least likely person to hit on me that I know.

horizontal rule
59

55 - Now I feel really terrible, what is the difference between infinite and transfinite numbers? I remember them being used pretty much interchangably, but my class attendance was admittedly spotty at best. I may have been hungover for that particular distinction.

horizontal rule
60

I thought everyone just abandoned the thread because they wanted to run off and discuss oral sex on the new one. Leaving this one to be about theoretical math, apparently.

horizontal rule
61

53: I was talking about that whole Cantor "aleph" stuff.

horizontal rule
62

I thought everyone just abandoned the thread because they wanted to run off and discuss oral sex on the new one. Leaving this one to be about theoretical math, apparently.

There's actually been very little discussion of oral sex on the other thread. And this thread is actually for meta-discussion, bickering and overuse of "actually."

horizontal rule
63

Hey, it's not just any oral sex, it's teenage oral sex!

Putting that on the internet is like dumping a pile of cocaine in a Motley Crue concert.

horizontal rule
64

the imaginative faculty, the ability to project yourself into someone else's experience.

It's bizarre how such a valuable skill is simultaneously so disdained. For years I have watched this play out with book recommendations -- women are just flat-out more willing to read about male protagonists than vice-versa, no matter how neutrally presented the options.

It happens with ethnicity too. I was shocked when I realized that parents were using code words to signal that they didn't want their (white) middle-schooler to "have to" read another "multicultural" novel.

I don't know how it became a sign of power not to have to care about another person's perspective. Sometimes I think the only way it will change is when powerful people model a different way.

(Like Ogged, starting this blog so we could all muse about gender issues.

horizontal rule
65

59: Cantor makes a distinction between the transfinite and the absolute infinite, which he -- fuck, who gives a shit?

Actually, even though commenters evidently got bored with teen oral sex, the other thread has the second example tonight of a pee-pee joke based on Weiner's name. So it's got that going for it.

horizontal rule
66

No, no, go on, we need to get to 1000 somehow.

horizontal rule
67

Are we there yet?

horizontal rule
68

Are we there yet?

horizontal rule
69

Are we there yet?

horizontal rule
70

Pipe down back there, or I'll turn this thread around right now.

horizontal rule
71

I'm going home now. I expect this thread to be massively commented when I return tomorrow.

horizontal rule
72

46- Ogged says in the post he goes on about eliminating traits that signal weakness. And I find it's a general undertone, if not overtone, of arguments around here. But mostly I was responding to the fact that a couple of people have asked if I'm essentialist about this sort of thing, and thought I'd clarify that I'm not.

horizontal rule
73

So, ac, how about that interest I showed in your thoughts? Eh?

horizontal rule
74

There was a big thread which turned into discussion of higher math at post 325, which someone remarked was the sum of squares two different ways. So it can be done. But it seems to be in the hoohole ("sum of * squares" is coming up blank on Yahoo!)

horizontal rule
75

Here's that comment 325, but I think the discussion of higher math happened in a different thread. By the way, google seems to be indexing the older threads now, thanks to some magic that Becks worked.

horizontal rule
76

73- Very impressive.

horizontal rule
77

There's more where that came from. Go ahead, think something else.

horizontal rule
78

I don't know if I fixed the hoohole, but I did find that comment easily by searching for "site:unfogged.com sum squares 325" on Google.

horizontal rule
79

No one knows the hooholes like the slutty lesbians.

horizontal rule
80

I have no life You all lack dedication.

horizontal rule
81

He did it twice?

horizontal rule
82

Maybe even more than that. It would have been easier to find the thread if comment counts still showed (note: this is not a complaint): I remembered it being a 500+ thread.

horizontal rule
83

I don't think you can make something not a complaint just by renouncing it's complaint nature. Cf. "I'm not being creepy, but..."

horizontal rule
84

"its," I meant "its." Fuck.

horizontal rule
85

44 sounds simultaneously like drug and sex euphemisms.

horizontal rule
86

It's just a statement of fact. It's not like there's really any reason to show the old comment counts, especially if google is really going to start indexing the old stuff again.

horizontal rule
87

But it's a statement of fact beginning with a conditional perfect that compares positively with the status quo, and being made within the hearing (reading, really) of people who may have the power to bring the desired state of affairs into being. That's a complaint, or maybe a request.

horizontal rule
88

@64:

isn't part of that the fact that novels about women are often 'what its like to be a woman in a man's world' as oposed to male protagonists are just 'what its like to be in the world'? i think that was part of the reason why i didn't like toni morrison (although more about race than gender).

horizontal rule
89

Without the accompanying disclaimers it may have been a complaint, but the disclaimers are there, so it's not. This isn't a case where the authorities are obligated to get involved once a comment has been made and as I have no desire to press charges file a complaint it is not a complaint.

horizontal rule
90

I don't know how it became a sign of power not to have to care about another person's perspective. Sometimes I think the only way it will change is when powerful people model a different way.

It's not so much a sign of power, but a sign of being a member of a powerful class. Joe White Guy (wild stereotyping, talking about broad generalities) doesn't lack the capacity to empathize with women or with minorities (to the extent that he does) because he's necessarily personally powerful, but because the powerful people he's needed to develop empathy with so he could get along in life have disproportionately been white men.

Which makes me think that the lack of empathy is the unusual quality -- women aren't empathetic because they're structurally out of power, men lack it because they're structually privileged. I would guess that a society with a more equal distribution of power would develop not less empathetic women and minorities, but more empathetic men and white people.

(This is vaguely related to the discussion on the other thread about distinguishing people by national origin. It's not that there's anything at all racist about being unable to tell if someone is Chinese or Korean by looking at them. It's that never having considered that it might be an interesting or useful distinction may mark you as a privileged twerp who doesn't think there's any reason anything outside their own group is worth of attention. It's a sort of provincialism that's much more available to members of a privileged group.)

horizontal rule
91

It's not that I think that it's imminently going to be eradicated, it's more what my or your or Ogged's utopian vision implies about what you value in people right now. It's something I think about when I get the sense that people around me prefer the company of men. Or prefer women who talk/act like men.

horizontal rule
92

isn't part of that the fact that novels about women are often 'what its like to be a woman in a man's world' as oposed to male protagonists are just 'what its like to be in the world'?

Argumentative response: Isn't the phrase "a man's world" the same as "the world" from a woman's perspective?

Less argumentative response: There are a lot of good books by women about being in the world that don't get a lot of publicity.

horizontal rule
93

Argumentative response: Isn't the phrase "a man's world" the same as "the world" from a woman's perspective?

For a treatment of a similar theme see Joe Frank's "The O.J. Chronicles" pts 1 and 2.

horizontal rule
94

And, hey, I even empathize with Tim for having to say so many times I've convinced him on this point. That's just how sensitive I am.

horizontal rule
95

91: Hrm. Let me forcefully separate myself from Ogged -- he's the one stamping out suspiciously feminine or gay behavior, not me.

I do think that a fair amount of what's coded as feminine in our society is that way due to powerlessness, and whether or not it's good in itself, it's not worth perpetuating powerlessness to preserve it. (Hyperbolic comparison: The blues? Excellent music. Probably wouldn't have existed without slavery and Jim Crow. If I had the option of changing history to eliminate slavery and Jim Crow, and that same change replaced the blues with ragtime throughout the 20th century, it'd be musically sad, but entirely worth it.)

horizontal rule
96

Are you ragging on ragtime?

horizontal rule
97

I do think that a fair amount of what's coded as feminine in our society is that way due to powerlessness, and whether or not it's good in itself, it's not worth perpetuating powerlessness to preserve it.

Right, but the questions are: (a) is it necessary to perpetuate powerlessness to preserve it, and (b) to the extent that it does reflect "powerlessness," and there are women who are OK with paying that price, what's it to you and why should they care? (I think baa made the latter point during one of these discussions.)

horizontal rule
98

The analogy that's coming to mind is like countries as they develop. You can preserve positive aspects of a culture as the country gets more prosperous and powerful, retaining some integrity and sense of history and so on, realization of where you come from and what was good about that. Rather than just becoming a series of American-style malls.

horizontal rule
99

I knew ac hated America!

horizontal rule
100

Well, sure. As I said, I'm not about stamping out anything now coded as feminine. I just want to change the system that shoehorns women into those feminine roles without their choice.

horizontal rule
101

I like ac's analogy.

horizontal rule
102

98::like authentic Irish pubs in Phoenix?

It was a joke in my day about the folk who went to Cuba to cut sugar cane and mingle with the proletariat, but maintaining compassion and empathy while in a comfortable position, without falling into sentimentality is really tough.

Maybe Woody abandoning his family and hitting the roads was an early sympton of the Huntington's, but to some degree Woody thought it was method, not madness.

horizontal rule
103

Names that also come to mind pretty easily, if they are at all pertinent to the thread:Bukowski, Henry Miller, Ehrenreich. Each would carry different stories, different points.

I wonder if Pynchon's isolation, if he is isolated, is a method. A lot of expatriots & self-exiles with a purpose, like Joyce. Monks & priests & nuns, or their equivalents in many religions, didn't vow asceticism as an affectation.

horizontal rule
104

Apart from America, has any country ever developed by becoming a series of American-style malls? Does acquiring a bunch of American-style malls after developing amount to the same thing?

horizontal rule
105

Data point: the not-girly women I've gone out with have also had empathy in spades. But tis true that they're not exactly easy to find.

horizontal rule
106

Less than 900 comments to go!

horizontal rule
107

104- I have heard this distinction applied to the way Spain developed versus how Mexico is developing.

horizontal rule
108

"Apart from America, has any country ever developed by becoming a series of American-style malls?"

It's not a country, only a state, but... Dubai?

horizontal rule
109

"Argumentative response: Isn't the phrase "a man's world" the same as "the world" from a woman's perspective?

Less argumentative response: There are a lot of good books by women about being in the world that don't get a lot of publicity."

isn't that the same thing i'm saying? if a book is from a woman's perspective, gender becomes a much bigger issue than it would be if the book was male perspective. isn't that classic male privilege? and so if you pick up a woman-book, odds are its going to be on a certain topic, one which i don't usually want to read about. of course there are 1000x as many great books out there than i will ever have time to read, so its more a 'information/finding' issue than anything else.

horizontal rule
110

109: I don't totally dispute this. Nevertheless, I have many times recommended a rip-roaring adventure story with a female heroine (e.g. Avi's The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle) to a boy, only to have him turn it down in favor of something much more plain vanilla. This has happened so frequently, and in so many different permutations, that I really don't think it can be boiled down to not wanting to read "a woman-book" because it's on a "certain topic."

horizontal rule
111

Back when I was young and had time to read anything besides blogs I used to actively seek out books by women. It was a thought process along the lines of, "women are different from me, therefore interesting". I must have been unaware of my own privelege or something.

horizontal rule
112

I just saw my first kitten! I am so happy. Also "privilege".

horizontal rule
113

books by women

Hey have I recommended Jennifer Egan's work over here yet?

He did it more than once?

I remember him pointing that out often enough to inspire me to write a program for generating numbers which are the sum of squares three or more different ways. The code is on my blog somewhere. Then Wolfson and I got in an argument or something argument-like about C vs. scripts.

horizontal rule
114

109: Yeah, but what I'm pointing out is that in saying "I don't want to read about being-a-woman-in-a-man's-world" is basically equivalent to saying "I don't want to read about being a woman." Which, like, really?

horizontal rule
115

vide

horizontal rule
116

and the result

horizontal rule
117

114: Yes, really. This seems totally consistent with that stuff about male privilege.

(I'm just clarifying. I love reading about women.)

horizontal rule
118

For that matter, writing about race and gender is about what it's like to be in the world. It isn't "on a certain topic." This is a totally bogus distinction. If you don't want to read about being a woman, or being black, it's your business what you do with your time, but you might as well just put it that way.

BV? Are you being ironic? 'Cause that seems perfectly logical, and in fact, makes me happy.

I will now return to driving nails through my hand to distract me from the pain.

horizontal rule
119

113: I just read, and endorse, The Keep. I have reason to think Standpipe in particular might like it.

horizontal rule
120

119 -- Could you see Daniel being a regular at Unfogged?

horizontal rule
121

I totally knew where Daniel was coming from.

Also, when I finished Look At Me (not really spoilers!) I was like, "c'mon, no one's going to get rich or famous showing people's lives unfold on TV and the internet." I now feel dumb.

horizontal rule
122

"If you don't want to read about being a woman, or being black, it's your business what you do with your time, but you might as well just put it that way."

i'm ok with putting it that way; those issues generally aren't all that consumingly interesting to me. its also seem to tend toward being about 'identity' which is kind of wankerish. its not bad, but i wouldn't want it to make up most of my reading. also they seem more appropriate for nonfiction writing.

horizontal rule
123

Wasn't, like, The Invisible Man the best thing you read in high school? Come on, you know it was.

horizontal rule
124

Oops. Minus the "The".

horizontal rule
125

118: The male privilege remark was ironic, not the rest. Not that I think my younger self was all that smart about gender. I think I had the idea that there was some sort of essence of female consciousness that I could come to understand, which seems pretty silly to me now.

horizontal rule
126

123: Absolutely it was. That's one good book.

horizontal rule
127

Matt -- I just recently read Look at Me but had I read it in 2001, I totally would have reacted that way too.

horizontal rule
128

Hey speaking of reality TV, I thought I remember hearing somewhere that there is going to be a reality TV version of Black Like Me coming out soon. Does anybody know about this? A white family and a black family swap people, who are made up to look like members of their host family's race, or something like that?

horizontal rule
129

I thought they already did that show.

horizontal rule
130

129 -- Yeah, that's the one I'm thinking of. I guess when I read a post a year ago that says something is forthcoming, it's likely that "forthcoming" will not continue to be a valid characterization indefinitely.

horizontal rule
131

125: Not a different essence, but a different experience, yes. (Some people even think the purpose of reading fiction is not just the pleasure of recognition and identification, but to teach you to recognize and understand things you couldn't otherwise!) So even if the essence stuff is mistaken, I think your younger self was not so dumb.

horizontal rule
132

What I don't get about this conversation is that the young female protagonist was the gold standard of across-the-board popular and high-art novels for England in the 18th and 19th centuries. (Ok, Dickens used orphaned boys in the more usual female roles.)

But tons of people read Pamela (for whose marriage the church bells of England famously tolled) and Clarissa, and the novels of Edgeworth, Burney, Radcliffe, Austen, Sand, and Eliot made cultural waves. Flaubert wrote Mme Bovary, rather than M. Bovary; yes, a line of criticism speaks to his appropriation of female literature, but what Emma's character also signifies is the readiness of that culture to enter into female lives.

So what's changed?

horizontal rule
133

Marriage is less dramatic? The consequences of immodesty are?

horizontal rule
134

Novels became "high art."

horizontal rule
135

Is an academic conference about to breakout in comments?

horizontal rule
136

I find the diversification of the media market argument rather convincing, even though I tend to loathe the people who insist on it.

horizontal rule
137

136: What argument is that?

horizontal rule
138

4 or 5 years ago I was asked at work to make an animated meeting opener containing a bunch of jokes about reality tv, but I said, come on, that crap is so over. Why a person without a tv was allowed to express an opinion, I don't know, but at least I got out of the job, and by the time it was clear how wrong I was, everyone had forgotten. Yay!

horizontal rule
139

122: Actually, it's not about being told what it's like to be a woman, it's about experiencing life from an alien point of view. That doesn't sound wankerish to me. On the contrary.

Possibly yo-yo just wants to help this thread reach 1000.

horizontal rule
140

But tons of people read Pamela (for whose marriage the church bells of England famously tolled) and Clarissa, and the novels of Edgeworth, Burney, Radcliffe, Austen, Sand, and Eliot made cultural waves. Flaubert wrote Mme Bovary, rather than M. Bovary; yes, a line of criticism speaks to his appropriation of female literature, but what Emma's character also signifies is the readiness of that culture to enter into female lives.

That culture extended into the twentieth century -- Orwell writes about children's books noting Little Women as a general purpose classic, not as a book which it was unusual for him to have read as a boy.

I have a strongly held but poorly supported opinion that the purported reluctance of boys to be interested in fiction about girls and women is a symptom of anti-feminist backlash, rather than something more innate. It seems to be new in the world after second-wave feminism.

horizontal rule
141

I think the same thing is true here, where we've had no backlash.

horizontal rule
142

141: I can't speak to the 'no backlash' point in Sweden, but you certainly have a media environment affected by US practices.

To take an example, there's a wildly popular educational TV show for small children here Dora the Explorer, which is IME as liked by small boys as by small girls. After it became really popular, a companion show with a boy hero (Dora's cousin) was introduced. That doesn't seem to have been a response to the fact that boys wouldn't watch Dora, because they were, in fact, crazy about the show -- it looks more like discomfort with the idea that a girl-centered show appealed so strongly to both sexes.

The 'boys won't be interested in anything focussed on girls' idea really appears to be top-down rather than a genuine response to consumer demand.

horizontal rule
143

re: 140

There may be something to that. However, if that 'boys own' culture is a reaction to feminism I think it's a reaction to first rather than second-wave feminism.

The 'boys' own' culture predates second-wave feminism by 40 or 50 years. As someone else remarked, so much of what we think of as 'tradition' was invented more or less wholesale during the late Victorian and early Edwardian periods. So, in the UK, you get the Scout Movement, the novels of Kipling and all the rest. Lots of the tropes about 'what boys like' date from that period and the period leading up to WWII.

The idea that boys like action with male protagonists is already well fixed a long time before second-wave feminism comes along.

As an aside: I, myself, am reluctant to read modern literary novels as a genre -- whether written by men, or by women -- so I suspect read rather fewer books by women or with female protagonists than I would otherwise. There's an introspective character to those novels that bores me in a way that 19th century literary fiction -- even a pretty introspective novel like Villette -- does not.

horizontal rule
144

You should avoid all the introspective whiny stuff and try reading modern literary novels that make no sense and contain scenes of explicit sex and violence. Some of them have female protagonists too (e.g. Mary Gaitskill's "Veronica").

horizontal rule
145

Or I could read a bunch of Kathy Acker and Katherine Dunn.

horizontal rule
146

The idea that boys like action with male protagonists is already well fixed a long time before second-wave feminism comes along.

This is different, though, from the current belief that the vast majority of boys simply won't be interested in anything with a female protagonist. A positive taste for entertainment with a hero you can identify with is different from categorical rejection of any entertainment that doesn't fit that mold. (For example, girls these days are expected to enjoy books and movies that focus on girls, but not to reject books and movies that focus on boys; boys are expected to be interested only in entertainment focused on boys.)

Second wave feminism might be the wrong date, but I think it's post WW-II rather than earlier in the century.

horizontal rule
147

For example, girls these days are expected to enjoy books and movies that focus on girls, but not to reject books and movies that focus on boys; boys are expected to be interested only in entertainment focused on boys.)

That's surprising. My understanding had been that the motivation for creating female characters like Dora was that women were underrepresented in such situations, and girls were being disadvantaged by that fact.

horizontal rule
148

What's surprising? There's reaction against it, but what's being reacted against is a strong assumption that anything girl-focused is going to be difficult or impossible to sell to boys.

(Mind you, I don't think this is true -- Dora was a huge hit among little kids of both sexes. In response to that fact, a boy-focused version starring her older cousin Diego has been introduced.)

horizontal rule
149

I guess I meant that I thought the assumption was that there was a loss for girls who don't have female fictive models like Dora. Which is to say that there is some value to gender-specific heros. Thus, I'd have assumed as much creation of female analogs to male characters as the reverse. All of which is to say that I would have thought the same assumptions would both produce Dora and motivate the belief that boys needed a gender specific role-model.

That said, part of it is clearly ac's point about feminine characteristics being deprecated (though, OTOH, do female kid characters display characteristics that could be thought of as "female" anymore?).

horizontal rule
150

Hrm. Let me say this again.

A positive taste for entertainment with a hero you can identify with is different from categorical rejection of any entertainment that doesn't fit that mold.

The assumption that I'm talking about is that on the one hand, girls, while they want to spend a certain amount of their time engaged in entertainment focused on female protagonists, have no objection to also focusing on male protagonists. On the other hand, boys are expected to object to (or rather, be totally uninterested in) ever engaging with something focused on a female protagonist.

horizontal rule
151

have no objection to also focusing on male protagonists. On the other hand, boys are expected to object to (or rather, be totally uninterested in) ever engaging with something focused on a female protagonist.

Right. But those aren't parallel statements. The parallel statement to "have no objection to..." is that boys have an objection to.... But you've said above that it isn't the boys who seem to mind as much as the adults.

What's not clear is whether, after correcting for a certain deprecation of feminine characteristics, the adults believe that it's bad for boys to identify with Dora. It seems not unreasonable for marketers to spawn two (or more) of everything new, as needed. Maybe they do. Maybe this is the "boys don't play with dolls" bit. But maybe this is just "I'll sell more shoes if I have a white NBA superstar than a black one." That's just a bet, and for a long time it was a pretty good one. In part, I'd want to know how often new hero creations are created in both genders, or both genders after success, I guess.

I think your complaint is about the adults, and I think it's that we make the assumption that girls can be exposed to other-gendered heros and boys can't, and that this is a function of a backlash (or maybe just the first lash) against feminism. That might be true, but I can think of a few other explanations that might explain those facts, including neutral-ish marketing assumptions.

horizontal rule
152

Which is to say that there is some value to gender-specific heros.

I don't get what you are saying here. You mean, that it's good to have heroes of both genders, so that everyone can find someone to identify with? Or that it's good to have, say, girl heroes that are designed to appeal only to girls?

horizontal rule
153

I think your complaint is about the adults, and I think it's that we make the assumption that girls can be exposed to other-gendered heros and boys can't, and that this is a function of a backlash (or maybe just the first lash) against feminism. That might be true, but I can think of a few other explanations that might explain those facts, including neutral-ish marketing assumptions.

The bolded claim is exactly right -- I think this is a adult-driven preference much more than it results from the unedited preferences of actual boys. I'd be interested in what you mean by 'neutral-ish marketing assumptions'.

horizontal rule