Raising a Gender-Neutral Child

Fascinating! A Canadian couple is raising their child in a gender-neutral manner in order to allow him/her to eventually decide which gender he/she identifies with: http://thefeministwire.com/2011/05/gender-neutral-or-wishful-thinking/

(May be old news, but I just came across it)

Vatican Official Stance on Marriage v. An American Sister

This post seems like a good discussion tool for me to end my discussion with. An American catholic sister wrote a book entitled  "Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics", which apparently does not line up with Vatican teachings.  Here is the yahoo article that goes into detail on it.

 http://news.yahoo.com/vatican-criticizes-us-nuns-book-sexuality-122647476.html

This article brings me back to our discussion on GBLTQI people with Jordan Garcia.  Although gay marriage and equality are not rights the Catholic Church officially stands for, the book is not going against dogma; in effect this is something that could be changed. “Farley wrote that homosexual people as well as their activities should be respected. Church teaching holds that gays should be respected but that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered."’  I suppose the first question that comes to mind here is how is possible to respect the person and not the acts that the person does? This is apparently what the church is advocating for.  According to the article Sister Margaret’s book calls for the legalizing of gay marriage, in that it could “help transform the stigmatization of gays”, according to Nicole Wintfield in the article.  Yet the church is taking its official stance on this issue that it somehow lessens the value of marriage that takes place between a man and a woman.  I do not see how this has any negative effect on the relationship between any people that love each other.  I am curious as to what the rest of you think about what Sister Margaret Farley is advocating for and the position of the church on the issues that she presents.

For Skittles, Death Brings Both Profit and Risk

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/29/us/skittles-sales-up-after-trayvon-martin-shooting.html?_r=2&ref=advertisingandmarketing


The controversies over Trayvon Martin's  death (Feb. 26th, 2012) continues to be a hot-topic in the New York Times, this time not just on the faulty manslaughter charges being examined by prosecutors but because of the recent increase in revenues by Skittles candies. The 17-year old African American teenager was shot by neighborhood watch volunteer, George Zimmerman, while walking through a gated housing community in Sanford, FL. Martin had just come from a nearby convenience store (where he purchased a bag of Skittles and a bottle of iced tea) while on his way to his father's girlfriend's home. Mr. Zimmerman was in his S.U.V. on neighborhood watch when he claims he was forced to shoot Martin out of self-defense and therefore was not charged (until after the trial took place). While the sweeping self-defense law in Florida was once held as the center of debate in this case, the most recent outrages have come from opinions surrounding the increase in Skittles candies and whether or not the increased profits should be going towards a case-related cause. Like the hooded sweatshirt he was wearing, the candy has been transformed into a cultural icon, symbolizing the 'racial injustices' of Martin's youth and innocence and the 'underscores' surrounding his sudden and tragic death. 

Several people on social media sites including Facebook, Twitter, etc; feel that Wrigley (distributor of Skittles) should donate money to Trayvon's family or to causes that would "help with racial reconciliation or underprivileged communities" because of the huge increase in sales, according to the NY Times article. Some even feel that people should stop buying Skittles until the company gets move involved in the case & gives in to donating at least some portion of its profits. 

Skittles spokeswoman, Jennifer Jackson Luth, would not comment on the impact of Skittles sudden popularity on profits. However crisis management and public relations experts who are watching the Skittles situation unfold say that the company has taken the correct initial stance, since any moves they make could cause backfire. For example, if it does donate money people will criticize them for it not being enough. If it speaks publicly, people will say they are capitalizing on it... Either way it's a very complex and dangerous position for them to be in. 

After examining both sides,  I feel that Skittles was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time and that they should stay out of it/ refuse to comment until they absolutely have to. This social media & icon trend will pass soon, if they can just wait it out long enough for profits to return to their stable and initial revenue levels from before the murder took place. When I saw this article I felt this related to some of the discussions and articles we read about particular trends & surges that have taken place due to racial outbursts. For example in the stories we acted out during the LGBT guest speaker group exercises, many of the crimes committed by government/ prison staff members were committed on racial grounds or motives. In Trayvon's killing, the neighborhood watch patroller thought he "was up to no good" largely because he was an african american male in a high-class neighborhood. There were very few causes indicating this was not the primary motivation behind the initial confrontation- which eventually lead to the shooting by Zimmerman. However the rippling effect on a company like Skittles is what is most interesting in this particular case, since there are so many events & subjects involved here- Ultimately linking a candy company's increase in profits with a racially- motivated manslaughter case. 

Women, are we wearing less and less?

I remember once I talked to my mom about women's summer dresses. My mom mentioned that it is funny that when she was young, women wear long skirts, and long sleeve shirts, to protect the reveling of too much skin. On the contrast, men wear short boxers walking in the street, and flip flops, etc. Years later, even thought it is still common to see men wear flip flops and shorts on the street. It is not quite that common to see men dress like that in Asia. Except for being in the swimming pool, all people in my dad's generation wear long pants during the hot summer, and so as the young men.

Let's see what girls wear, in a night club, on a performance, or even when we attend a show. We think short shorts make legs look longer, that is why we are in favor of those cloths that would help on this. Years ago, if one wears bikini on a beach, people would consider that person has a lot of courage. However, if you walk on a beach wearing a normal full-body baking suit, people would wonder, " hey girl, are you here for a swimming lesson?"

How could one get a lot of media attention really fast? It is apparently easier for girls than boys. The answer is, take off the cloths! It is not comfortable for every girl to do so, like to dance in public wear what the girls in the picture wears, however for those who wants the attention and dare or enjoys it, using the body is a very powerful tool. They do not feel offended by people's judgement. They might even proud of their moves, their dresses.

It is really one individual's will to choose what to wear, what to show to the world. We always hear that people say " Show the world what you've got". It might just be one way of showing the world a real myself. However is it the world/society's fault by structuring the image of reveling body is good? And thus encouraged more young girls to do so? Is it because men like to see that, so girls are willing to sell meat for attention, money and other things?

The Japense ladies after Tsunami hit

What happens after the 2011 Tsunami in Japan? As we all known, people got negatively affected by this. However I had never realized how much it affected women differently until I start to think about it.

A few months ago, during the winter break, I went to visit Japan. In Tokyo, the fast moving city, people still move around light-speed and dress nicely. However when you go to a grocery store, you will find people look clearly into the details of, let's say a bottle of water, a box of yogurt, etc. What are they checking? After a few conversations with them, I learned that people check where those products were made. If a bottle of water was from the south Japan, and far away from Sendai and Tokyo, people would like to pay more to get this bottle of water than the ones that were made locally or from the North. When I went to my friend's house for dinner, she was talking about the rice we were eating, very proudly. Because the rice were from the south part of Japan which is a bit further away from the radiation.

Clearly, the radiation scared everyone. I remember that before I took the trip to Japan, my doctor, who is really good at using natural herbs and Chinese Medicine to cure almost any kind of disease, has warned me seriously that the radiation would negatively affect my fertilization and become hard to get pregnant later. What happens after I got this advice and saw how carefully the Japanese chose their food? I left the country two weeks earlier. Yes, I changed the plan because I need to think of my chance of giving birth to my kids.

Women, by nature, do carry the duty of reproduction and take care of the family. Therefore the radiation from the disaster left every women there in panic. Not only did they need to check the original souse of the drinking water, but also they need to carry the extra burdens. 

Women, are we weaker than men by nature?

I have no answer to this question. However, since I’ve been holding for this question in myself for too long, thus I want to ask and share it with you all.

It is no doubt that men are stronger, physically. They can jump higher, run faster, hit harder and even survive longer if they do not have bad habits. When you turn on the TV and start to watch sport. How many of you would like to watch a women’s team play over men’s team. Even with the same media coverage, I will for sure watch the men’s game, for most of the games. Men’s basketball game, football game, swimming competition, gymnastics, etc, all of those games are more excited to watch. It is no doubt that the excitement of watching the NBA game can never be brought out by watching women's basketball play.

In the field of science, even though we have genius female scientists like Marie Curie, it is mostly men that push the world forward. As a woman myself, I am not saying that women are not important, however I am just interested in why there are a significant less amount of women when you go to the top of every field. Mostly, every women cook, however the top cook in world famous restaurants are 90% men. Mostly every women take care of their kids, however the world’s best educators/ professors, etc are mostly men. Even though girls might be just as good as boys or even better than boys in school, however when it comes to life, a tens of years of circle, men always exceed women in some way.

Is it that female has a nature to take care of the family and do not want to put themselves all out in the career? Or is it that women by nature are weaker which leaves male the main force to push the world forward? I think that the answer differs and it might be not possible for anyone to figure it out. It might also be that female and male are by nature different from each other, we have different duties and work to finish in the world, no one should judge which one is better which one is not. We should just live with it.

Female Sex Offenders: Getting Off Too Easy?

            I read this article a few weeks ago and was really interested in the idea that men and women are treated different in accounts of perpetrating sexual abuse. In this case, a former teacher’s aid was convicted of three separate accounts of sexual abuse with a minor, and she has received lifetime probation and no jail time. This article points out the interesting double standard wherein male sexual predators generally go to jail and for a much longer time than their female counterparts. I actually had a teacher in highschool who was a female who was mixed up in a sexual abuse scandle with a student, however she remained teaching at my school and has continued since. Our male band teacher did not fare so well under the same charges.

            Generally, women are the victims of the legal system, however I believe that this is a huge concern and problem. A minor is a minor, female or male, and they should have their sexual rights protected, particularly from adults that are supposed to be in positions of utmost trust. While there are considerably fewer accounts of female teacher’s sexually abusing their students, it does not mean that the women who commit these acts should not be treated equally and fair under the law.  If women want equality, we must be willing to accept the downsides of equality as well.

Here is the article: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/05/gabriela_compton_received_lifetime_probation_for_sexually_abusing_two_boys_.html

Born This Way Foundation Launch Event @ Harvard

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSzlPKGoOTA

Throughout the research that I did for my final project on Stefani Germanotta (Lady Gaga) I came across this video the launch event that was hosted at Harvard University for Lady Gaga's non-profit, The Born This Way Foundation. It's pretty long so I don't expect you to watch the whole thing however, I thought I would post it for those who are interested in knowing more about her involvement in empowering LGBT homeless youth. When I discovered this video I was surprised to learn that Harvard's graduate school dean, Kathleen McCartney also played a major role in the development of the foundation. She is the woman speaking at the beginning of the video and announces the mission, values, and goals set forth by Stefani Germanotta and her mother, Cynthia. As I mentioned during my presentation, the Born This Way Foundation was founded by Lady Gaga whose vision is to foster a more accepting society, where differences are embraced and individuality is celebrated. By developing the Foundation she is committed to creating a "safe community that helped connect young people with the skills and opportunities they need to build a braver, kinder world because she believes that everyone should have the right to feel safe, to be empowered and to make a difference in the world," according to the Foundations mission statement. Additional information about the foundation can be found at: http://bornthiswayfoundation.org/

Enjoy!

Yves Saint Laurent Exhibit: Women's Bodies in Fashion

This past weekend I went to the Yves Saint-Laurent exhibit at the Denver Art Museum, (http://www.denverartmuseum.org/exhibitions/yves-saint-laurent-retrospective). The exhibit had dozens of original Yves Saint Laurent designs and many interactive video’s and recorded speeches by Saint Laurent himself, who died in 2008. I was fascinated by Saint Laurent’s unique take on the female body within the world of fashion. Saint Laurent insisted on designing his clothes on an actual female body, rather than adhering to an unrealistic mannequin, so that his clothes fit to flatter a real woman, rather than a mold of unrealistic proportions. Saint Laurent often said that the most beautiful thing in the world is the naked body, and was known for his controversial use of lace and see-through fabric in the late 1960’s.

It seemed that Yves Saint Laurent was able to more accurately design for a female’s comfort, style and individual sexuality of the woman wearing the clothes, rather than the sexuality imposed upon a woman’s body by men. Many of the designs were rather unflattering on the mannequins, but once on a woman’s body in photographs and magazine spreads, the garments came alive, and many famous women of the last fifty years raved about the comfort and femininity of Yves Saint Laurent’s style.

He is also known for introducing the first ready to wear clothing line; a haute couture fashion line that was affordable for the everyday woman. Yves Saint Laurent is known for introducing the safari jacket, but particularly the smoking jacket for women. He stylized the suit and man’s tuxedo for a woman who is strong, confident, and beautiful. This exhibit was really interesting because it brought the issue of women’s body and who “owns” them into the forefront in a completely different way than I’d ever considered it before. This exhibit is incredible, I highly recommend it whether you enjoy fashion or not!

denial of constitutional right to vote

While checking my facebook feed, I saw a post from one of my professors from undergrad. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/05/27/491012/exclusive-florida-ineligible-to-vote/?mobile=nc here is the link for the article he posted.  While reading the article one of our class discussions very quickly came to mind.  When Maria asked us to think of a time that a right was taken away.  The article pointed out that many citizens in Florida may be denied their constitutional right to vote for their president.  The only refuge these people have for the time being is to respond to a letter mailed to them “within 30 days”.  Knowing that things get lost in the mail and how many things accidently can go unopened until the time is too late this seems crazy to me.  Perhaps the most outrageous part that the article brings to light is that “an excess of 20 percent of the voters flagged as “non-citizens” in Miami-Dade are, in fact, citizens.”  How can a state get its numbers so incredibly wrong? According to the article “Hispanic, democratic and independent-minded voters are the most likely to be targeted.”  Why do you think it is that Hispanic and democratic voters are more likely to be targeted than white people or republicans? Knowing there are so many errors in their lists I do not understand how things were ever allowed to get to this point.  I can only hope that the legal team in charge of fighting against this will prevail to prevent the injustice that could happen to many US citizens.  

Argentina Approves Transgender Rights

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/10/gender-identity-law-argentina_n_1505093.html

This happened about a week ago and I thought I would share it as the article connects to some of the issues surrounding transgender/transexual identity that were mentioned in class today!

Obama speaks to graduates at Barnard

My mom was watching MSNBC, like she does many mornings. This particular
morning I tuned in with her and we heard President Obama give a speech to
Barnard College in NYC.

http://barnard.edu/headlines/president-barack-obama-addresses-barnard-class-
2012

If you want to hear his whole commencement speech it is currently the
first video on the link above. As Barnard College is an all girls’ school, it was very
interesting to hear the president speak to the graduates. The president mentioned
that there was much in common with the graduates that sit before him as when he
graduated in 1983, as at that time the country was recovering from an economic
recession as well. He added that as women graduating, there is even more that
needs to be dealt with like “whether you will be able to earn equal pay for equal
work… whether you will be able to fully control decisions about your own health
and while opportunities have grown exponentially for women over the past 30
years as young people as many ways you have it worse than we do.”

He continued on that people will try and convince you that “change is
impossible; that you cannot make a difference, that you won’t be able to close
that gap between life as it is and life as you want it to be… my job today is to tell
you don’t believe it because as tough as things have been I am convinced you are
tougher.” The part that caught my attention the most came slightly later in the
president’s speech. His statements made me think of one of our class discussions
with Maria about women going into office and having power not only for women
but also for the people of their countries. The president said, “after decades of slow
steady extraordinary progress, you are now poised to make this the century where
women shape not only their own destiny but the destiny of this nation and this
world.” He said that the women in front of him need to “Fight for a seat at the table.”
I find it interesting that he brought up our history in that there were no women
who signed key historical documents such as our constitution. He echoed a point
that was made in one of the imaginary letters that we read though that although a
woman may not have signed it “we can assume that there were founding mothers
whispering smarter things in the ears of the founding fathers.”

He continued on to encouraged women to stand up for their rights and what
they believe in. I feel that the speech the president gave to this graduating class
sums up very well much of what we have discussed in class. His speech brings home
the idea that although we have come a long way, there is still more that can (and
needs to) be done but we must keep pushing forward and keep working.

The War on Women??

For weeks, if not months, there have been references in the media to a Republican “War on Women” that is manifesting itself in legislation that seeks to limit access to contraception and legal abortions. Additionally, there’s been a right v. left, liberal v. conservative kerfuffle surrounding comments made about whether Ann Romney is a working woman with a ‘real job’ or simply a stay-at-home-mom, as well as the recent Time magazine article that asked women if they were “Mom Enough” to subscribe to attachment parenting.

 From my relatively liberal, feminist viewpoint, concerns over access to reproductive health are valid and I, too, fear what will/might/could happen if contraception and abortion become increasingly inaccessible. Yet, I know that for everyone who shares my opinion, there are others who find my interpretation of feminism distasteful. Last semester, I researched Concerned Women for America, which is a conservative women’s organization with membership larger than NOW (National Organization of Women). They too define themselves as feminists and as working for women’s issues, but this takes a very different form as they fight the conservative side of the War against Women.

I find this article interesting because it illustrates the simple fact that despite having certain biological similarities, women cannot be addressed as an ideologically-unified block. (As a caveat, I’m posting this article not because I subscribe to any of its viewpoints, but because I think it’s important to understand the arguments made by those on the other side of any argument).

Women's art worth less?

Art and women have always gone together. I remember as a child walking aimlessly through the St. Louis Art Museum. Seeing those renaissance portraits of women moved me. Those stoic and scantily, clad women introduced me to the true form of beauty, away from the hypercritical eye of today's advertisers. It is interesting then, that women have seemed to always have a place in art on the canvas, but not necessarily in front of it.

This article in the economist highlights the vast differences between the price of art by male artists and by female artists. The differences are shocking. If you look at the bottom of the article, there is a chart that maps out the top ten highest paid artists for female and males. The most a female artist earned from a painting is around 10 million, and a male in comparison 8 times that. This correlates with the video we watched last class, but with a twist. This is a subjective worth, so why do people think that a piece of art done by a female is worth less than a piece of art done by a male?

The article highlights that there is change underfoot. Female artists are now included in exhibits and some avid collectors are now female and interested in the female perspective. But does this really indicate permanent change? Or does it indicative of the present and future struggles of women in an industry that has been dominated by men?

Gender in the Workplace

This New York Times article delves a little into some of the changing gender patterns in the American workforce, highlighting the growing population of males entering into previously female-dominated positions. The NYT conducted an analysis of census data from 2000 to 2010 that shows "occupations that are more than 70 percent female accounted for almost a third of all job growth for men, double the share of the previous decade." I felt this article shows an interesting perspective, particularly in addressing the "male" aspects of gender relations like many of us voiced in class as being a piece that often gets left out of discussions about gender in general.

However, I think the article also cheapens female-oriented work in the way in which it gets compared with male jobs ("prestigious" for male positions vs. "occupations that their fathers might never have considered" for female positions but no mention of 'prestige' or anything of the sort for those). I don't know exactly how to articulate it, but I feel there is a definite notion that they are creating more of a hierarchy of importance with their word choices, even if unintentionally.. almost as if women are now vying for male jobs while men are just settling for female jobs, if that makes sense.

I think it's interesting the connection this article makes to "women's jobs" being, in the long-run, more stable and capable of growth both professionally and monetarily yet today's women are competing for the "prestigious, high-wage professions dominated by men." I feel like this connects to the ideas Professor Suarez-Toro presented in class (and the documentary she showed) about what is and is not considered 'valuable' or "productive" in terms of the work women do, be it in the domestic realm or elsewhere. It seems like this article is showing the importance of and perhaps commending the strategic moves made by women to provide long-term support for their families, yet somehow works to challenge their motives and capabilities at the same time when talking about a male assuming such roles.

Do you know of any peers that you feel have broken the normative gender roles in their professional fields? If so, what kind of backlash or support have they felt? And what might that say about inside/outside the box social constructs? How do you think NYT could have changed their story to better demonstrate the "value" or "productiveness" of the positions historically deemed female-specific? Or, do you think they do a good job and I am just being too critical?

When not wearing make-up becomes a news story…

During a recent trip to Bangladesh, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton created quite the media buzz – not over her successful negotiations with China and India, but for wearing glasses, little make up, and naturally loose hair during one of her public appearances. The images of her went viral and hundreds of news outlets commented on her appearance. The Drudge Report labeled the image as “Hillary Au Naturale” and Fox News questioned whether Clinton simply “forgot” to put her make up on and claimed she “appears tired and withdrawn - far from the well-coiffed image she has maintained over the past two decades in politics.”

It is infuriating that even a woman as powerful as Hillary Clinton – fourth in line to the presidency – makes headlines for her appearance, but not for her diplomatic successes. As one journalist noted, “The continued focus on women’s appearance is just depressing for parents trying to teach their little ones that smarts and kindness and achievement matter more than an outfit or hairdo.” For women leaders, their appearance is somehow always linked to their job performance. It didn’t matter that Clinton had successful negotiations in China and India the day before, because by not wearing make-up everyone assumed that she must be “tired” or “burnt out.” Never mind the fact that in three years the woman has traveled 777,721 miles to over 96 countries – that, somehow, is less newsworthy.

Although she never should have had to in the first place, Clinton defended herself to CNN, saying, "I feel so relieved to be at the stage I'm at in my life right now. Because you know if I want to wear my glasses I'm wearing my glasses. If I want to wear my hair back I'm pulling my hair back. You know at some point it's just not something that deserves a lot of time and attention. And if others want to worry about it, I let them do the worrying for a change." And this is yet another reason why I love her.

Surviving Progress

Hi class! This is the trailer for the Surviving Progress. I thought the parallels were interesting between the hunter/gatherer society that drove mammoths off cliffs and the economic progress that we view as beneficial in society today. This reflects quite nicely to today's documentary, specifically the comments made about economics having no basis in reality. As I commented in class, the role of international lenders in the exploitation of resources in developing nations is highlighted in the documentary. It's also worrying from a development standpoint -where do we as development workers go from here? I think much of it comes down to civic response and activity, and relates to the Occupy movement quite nicely. We have money and a unrealistic view of the economy controlling politics and allowing for the destruction of our planet in more ways than one. One of the interviewees in the documentary stated that if just for the purpose of self-interest, we need to reform, use less and transform the oligarchy system of government back to the democracy it's supposed to be.

Migration, Development, and Ciudad Juarez

This article by the New York Times illustrates several interesting intersections between globalization and migration and their affects on daily life in Ciudad Juarez, arguably the most dangerous and most trafficked Mexican border town through which Latin Americans immigrate to the United States. When NAFTA opened borders to lessen restrictions on legal trade across the US/Mexico border, illegal trade markets increased as well. As such, violence and danger associated with drug trade/other types of illegal trafficking (human, organ, etc) skyrocketed, particularly through the immigration hubs like Ciudad Juarez. I feel like this article is interesting because it not only acknowledges some of the negative consequences of neoliberalism (about which Maria spoke about in class last week), but it also portrays the way in which individuals on the ground level are trying to maintain hope and resume daily life activities in the face of the violence that has infiltrated their city for the past 10+ years. I just think that people often forget that innocent civilians who cannot uproot must live among these types of conditions day to day and maintain some sort of life for themselves. While several circumstances play into the situation in Juarez, some of the foundational problems, I would argue, do stem from the onslaught of the neoliberal era. Can you think of any positive stories that have run lately that come out of the borderlands? Why might the American media shy away from covering 'new angle' stories about situations happening at the border? Do you think this is a 'new angle' or at least coverage of a legitimate 'positive' situation, or do you think it's just a fluff piece that ignores the glaring issues?

worst place to be a woman

Thanks to my husbands mom posting a link on facebook I saw a video by PBS on Eastern Congo, which according to the article the UN named the worst place to be a woman.  

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/globalhealth/jan-june12/healafrica_03-07.html

When I originally saw the posting I did not stop to really listen to it.  After class last week I realized that unlike what we watched in class, a woman from Congo got to speak for herself about what happened to her.  This is a nice contrast to what we saw in class, the woman’s face was covered because of an attack to it, somehow I think the fact that you could not see her mouth move as she was speaking made it more powerful.  I could not understand her until the translator repeated what she said but the emotion she spoke with came through without an actual understanding.  The respect I have gained for this woman that I have never met and most likely never will is indescribable.  Her lips were cut off after being hit in the head for not bringing her daughter back to militia.  After all she has been through she is afraid to go to the police.  This is an extreme example of the government not having the power to stand up for womens rights or more importantly for the human right to be safe from attack or at least be able to punish those who have wronged you.  

Personally I feel that this PBS story did a better job at engaging you with the story as we know exactly what country is being spoken about and we are getting stories from people who live there as opposed to the general story with no voices from the people who live there.  It does bring home the point that Maria Suarez made in class though, that women’s rights are not the main concern when human rights and just living are on the forefront.  

Shawn Johnson... fat?!?!?!?!

I fail to understand where these people are coming from.  While going through Yahoo news the other day I came across this article: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/olympics-fourth-place-medal/shawn-johnson-lost-25-pounds-hurtful-fat-talk-211635709.html  

It contains both a before and after picture of Shawn Johnson, apparently in the first picture she had gained weight since the last Olympics.  She has subsequently lost it but it is amazing to me that of all people someone who has won gold medals in gymnastics could have been questioning her body as she was.  I think the important point to make here is even in her “heavy” picture she looks amazing, she does not look overweight at all from what I can tell.  It does not seem possible that a girl who has the guts to perform in front of so many people could possibly still be questioning if she is pretty or good enough.  According to the article she was saddened by the fact that she was questioning herself.  

Although I am glad that she seems to be starting to realize just how crazy it was to question her looks, she does still have a little way to go.  She has to realize that her body is one of an athlete and being too skinny is not good for her muscle strength.  On top of that as an Olympic Gold Medalist she has many young girls who are looking up to her.  If she is too fat imagine how the girls who do not have her body hearing her say that she is too big.  How are those girls to ever feel that they are pretty enough especially, when hearing skinny girls talking about being fat? I will add here that body image should not be based on just what we see and hear from the media.  I was lucky enough to be one of the few girls who felt good about their body at impressionable ages and while knowingly not having a perfect body.  I know that this is not the case for so many young people and this article brings home just how important it is for girls to start having better impressions of themselves.