Gender Stereotypes: UPDATED

 This video was found on Sociological Images, thanks to the Situationist.  As the first site remarks, it is hard to tell whether the stereotypes are being parodied or accepted.  It does not seem to have a single perspective on them.  But it is a useful visual presentation of them, along with the overall idea  that women are all alike, as men are also.  It’s also silly enough to allow the kind of distance that a discussion of stereotyes needs.


On watching the video a second time, I’m having second thoughts about posting it. 

WHAT DO YOU THINK?  Useful compilation or offensive?

8 thoughts on “Gender Stereotypes: UPDATED

  1. I wouldn’t use this in my Gender Issues in Psychology class. There are a million things like this and after teaching for many years I know it wouldn’t produce critical discussion. It would just be another — girls do this, guys do this discussion — with some people saying “But I don’t do this” or “But I do that”. Boring!

  2. I agree with Sharon. While I really enjoyed the animation style (and, I admit to one loud guffaw for the ‘seducing’ — sorry), I don’t see much of value for use at an advanced level of discussion. I checked out Bruno Bozzettoo’s website and did not get much more insight. He has attempted some shorts in the social criticism vein, but it is not clear that he acts on a clear politic in this regard.

  3. I came here by way of Learned on Women, this is a subject that interests me as my business speaks to women moreso than men. In terms of the animation, this engaged me visually, moved at a good pace and I enjoyed the music. Looks clever, well-done. I’m not an academic, but I would agree this doesn’t belong in a classroom, unless an educator could build something more substantive around it – fit it into a selection of media on the topic and discuss which is most effective, which is most offensive and so on, something like that.

    What I find interesting is that it doesn’t have a “negative” feel to it at all. The intent of the creator comes through as benign or perhaps as someone crafting a curious exploration of the topic. Could just be me, I’m in a good mood today.

    I would use this on a blog or Web site to generate discussion, I might work some questions around it to engage readers. But offensive? Not at all.

  4. I share your worries, Sharon– it’s so hard to avoid those responses anyway. But, in an intro classes, combined with some more substantive material, I still think it might work.

  5. What I liked about it was particularly its two bits on speaking and conversation. I take some of our discussions here about women in philosophy to raise issues in these areas, and I like the idea of something that makes them accessible to talk about. Speaking probably not just for myself, I do find the insistence of a kind of linear speaking to be restrictive, and the combative mode of discourse is one a lot of women in philosophy say thay are unhappy about.

    I also found the idea that a man can leave his home and travel around without being tied to it the way women are something that resonnated with a lot of my experience, though perhaps not everyone ones. When our son was very young, we and two other families used to share child care on days when schools were closed; whichever parent’s turn it was would work at home. All of us mothers marvelled at the fact that when the daddies were doing the sitting, the boys could dismantle whole sections of the house without the daddy on call noticing. The boys quickly got it that they couldn’t engage daddy, but none of us really could completely shut ourselves off. I hope that’s changed, though not necessary toward the daddy model.

Comments are closed.