This is my daughter. I chose to represent the "two cultures" of childhood because of something she said to me a few years ago. From the beginning, we have always aimed not to push her into only stereotypical female roles. For example, her name is androgynous, as was her pirate themed nursery. But while we don't discourage her from liking traditionally feminine things, she has always seemed to gravitate toward them. Then, a couple of years ago, when she was around five or six years old, one day out of the blue she asked me if it was okay that she was "not all the way a girl." When I asked her to clarify, she told me that while she was mostly a girl, she had some "tomboy and boy kind of" parts to her, too, and expressed to me that she was worried about it.
I believe that this conversation showed her experiences with early childhood gender segregation. As stated in the textbook, "Gender segregation begins early. Even before the age of two years, children show preferences ... This preference intensifies throughout the early and middle childhood years" (Rudman, Glick 57). It goes on to state that, " ... even in circumstances in which adults explicitly discourage sex segregation, children nevertheless develop and maintain it" (Rudman, Glick 57) and later that "segregation both allows and encourages girls and boys to develop separate social worlds or "cultures" characterized by different activities, interaction styles, and social rules. Over time, the more boys play with boys and girls with girls, the more gender typed their play activities become" (Rudman, Glick 59). Basically, regardless of what we thought we had been teaching her at home, she was being socialized to two different cultures of childhood and looking for me to assure her it was okay if she did not adhere to only one.
For my photo, I chose to have her wear the princess dress and the knight's helmet to show
the contrast between childhood boy culture and childhood girl culture. Clearly, they are much
different items and invoke very different types of play. This dress was originally purchased for
her to wear to Disneyworld, when she was about four. It had been in a box for some time when I
dug it out for this photo, as she has long since gotten over princesses. I left it wrinkled rather
than steaming it because the knight's helmet is so serious, and I wanted the wrinkles in the dress
to convey that this is still just a child at play. I chose our deck to take the photo on because it
gives off a sort of tree house feel, which to me is heavily symbolic of childhood.
It was shot using only natural light in the late afternoon/early evening, and the backlighting was on purpose so that the light would provide a glow. This represents that sort of magical feel about childhood, regardless of which culture (boy or girl). My favorite part is that she is stepping into the sunlight from the shade, while proudly wearing both cultures of childhood. The hand on the hip and blonde hairs falling out of the back of the helmet are the only indicators of which gender she may be. That could very well be a little boy under there, if he had long blonde hair and a lot of sass. I think it speaks for the uniformity of childhood regardless of which norms are pushed. Differences between genders, whether real or imagined, hardly seem a legitimate reason to make children deal with two separate cultures.
It was shot using only natural light in the late afternoon/early evening, and the backlighting was on purpose so that the light would provide a glow. This represents that sort of magical feel about childhood, regardless of which culture (boy or girl). My favorite part is that she is stepping into the sunlight from the shade, while proudly wearing both cultures of childhood. The hand on the hip and blonde hairs falling out of the back of the helmet are the only indicators of which gender she may be. That could very well be a little boy under there, if he had long blonde hair and a lot of sass. I think it speaks for the uniformity of childhood regardless of which norms are pushed. Differences between genders, whether real or imagined, hardly seem a legitimate reason to make children deal with two separate cultures.
Works Cited
Rudman, Laurie A., and Peter Glick. The Social Psychology of Gender: How Power and
Intimacy Shape Relations. New York: The Guilford Press, 2008. Print.
Rudman, Laurie A., and Peter Glick. The Social Psychology of Gender: How Power and
Intimacy Shape Relations. New York: The Guilford Press, 2008. Print.
3 comments:
From: Coral
I love how the golden, magical light is behind her. If a viewer were in front of her, she’d have the light behind her, making her look heroic and valiant with her shining armor, glowing dress, and confident posture with her stance wide and hands on her hips. She’d be an androgynous silhouette of bravery, tying in to the bravery it takes a child to cast off the constraints of gender norms.
I also love that she is barefoot, rooted to the “treehouse” (which is brilliant) by a childish wildness and freedom. To me, it felt symbolic of the freedom that lies between the two gender cultures. She is symbolic from her head to her toes. The helmet for strength, the dress for beauty, her feet for freedom.
Even the tree beside her could be construed as meaningful. The deck was built around it. It is what it is regardless of the construct around it, as is a person who does not obey the constructs of gender. It’s a big tree, while she is a little person, but it grows over her shoulders, as does her future as an adult.
The fact that her hair comes out from underneath her helmet is poignant as well. She could have put it up, but she lets it fall free, rejecting the rules of how a helmet is worn, or more symbolically, how masculinity is worn. She is her natural self, adorned in a helmet she’ll grow in to, and a dress that, with its wrinkles, doesn’t even quite conform to its own rules either.
I love this photo! It reminds me of being a little kid and going to a princess themed birthday party wearing chain-mail with pink tights and Maryjane’s. Everyone else was wearing gowns and plastic tiaras but I didn’t care I wanted to be a knight. I think this is something lots of children feel.
Casey’s pose is so confident and the shadow she is casting onto the ground is very nice. The trees in the back are a bit spooky, a good contrast to the bright color of her dress. Yellow is also such a happy and confident color and this is another example of how bright and strong she is in the photo. I like that even though she is wearing a helmet it feels like she is looking straight at the camera. Her whole body is turned away but as a viewer it doesn’t feel like she is distancing herself from the camera, instead, it looks like she is ready to fight.
Another thing I really like in this photo is the use of lines. It feels like they stand for the way society pressures children to dress and play specific ways. It tells them that they need to adhere to their assigned at birth gender roles. The tree next to her is an example of this; the bark creates sharp edges and lines crisscrossing each other and mimics the shadow of the fence and the trees in the background. Your daughter seems to ignore this or not realize its happening. The photo is saying that she doesn’t care what society wants from her she just wants to be a kid.
From: Bryce
I think this photo symbolizing a clash between the two separate cultures boys and girls are brought up in speaks volumes on our society. I admire the fact you described each piece of the child's attire and even the stance and posture, while going into explanation of how the child could be either gender. The child in the photo shows the innocence and wild nature of children, while also trying to break free of societal norms expected of children.
Post a Comment