<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Parentics &#187; Barbara Ehrenreich</title>
	<atom:link href="http://parentics.com/author/barbarae/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://parentics.com</link>
	<description>Where parenting and politics intersect</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 19:50:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Bonfire of the Princesses</title>
		<link>http://parentics.com/2007/12/12/bonfire-of-the-princesses/</link>
		<comments>http://parentics.com/2007/12/12/bonfire-of-the-princesses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:23:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Barbara Ehrenreich</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gender roles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[princess]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[role models]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://parentics.com/2007/12/12/bonfire-of-the-princesses/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Contrary to the rumors I have been trying to spread for some time, Disney Princess products are not contaminated with lead. More careful analysis shows that the entire product line – books, DVD’s, ball gowns, necklaces, toy cell phones, toothbrush holders, t-shirts, lunch boxes, backpacks, wallpaper, sheets, stickers, etc. – is saturated with a particularly [...]

<script type="text/javascript">
SHARETHIS.addEntry({
	title: "Bonfire of the Princesses",
	url: "http://parentics.com/2007/12/12/bonfire-of-the-princesses/"
});
</script>
	]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Contrary to the rumors I have been trying to spread for some time, Disney Princess products are not contaminated with lead. More careful analysis shows that the entire product line – books, DVD’s, ball gowns, necklaces, toy cell phones, toothbrush holders, t-shirts, lunch boxes, backpacks, wallpaper, sheets, stickers, etc. – is saturated with a particularly potent time-release form of the date rape drug.<span id="more-27"></span></p>
<p>We cannot blame China this time, because the drug is in the concept, which was spawned in the Disney studios. Before 2000, the Princesses were just the separate, disunited, heroines of Disney animated films – Snow White, Cinderella, Ariel, Aurora, Pocahontas, Jasmine, Belle, and Mulan. Then Disney’s Andy Mooney got the idea of bringing the gals together in a team. With a wave of the wand ($10.99 at Target, tiara included)  they were all elevated to royal status and set loose on the world as an imperial cabal, and have since have busied themselves achieving global domination. Today, there is no little girl in the wired, industrial world who does not seek to display her allegiance to the pink- and-purple clad Disney dynasty.</p>
<p>Disney likes to think of the Princesses as role models, but what a sorry bunch of wusses they are. Typically, they spend much of their time in captivity or a coma, waking up only when a Prince comes along and kisses them. The most striking exception is Mulan, who dresses as a boy to fight in the army, but—like the other Princess of color, Pocahontas—she lacks full Princess status and does not warrant a line of tiaras and gowns. Otherwise the Princesses have no ambitions and no marketable skills, although both Snow White and Cinderella are good at housecleaning.</p>
<p>And what could they aspire to, beyond landing a Prince? In Princessland, the only career ladder leads from baby-faced adolescence to a position as an evil enchantress, stepmother or witch. Snow White’s wicked stepmother is consumed with envy for her stepdaughter’s beauty; the sea witch Ursula covets Ariel’s lovely voice; Cinderella’s stepmother exploits the girl’s cheap, uncomplaining, labor. No need for complicated witch-hunting techniques – pin-prickings and dunkings—in Princessland. All you have to look for is wrinkles.<br />
Feminist parents gnash their teeth. For this their little girls gave up Dora, who bounds through the jungle saving baby jaguars, whose mother is an archeologist and whose adventures don’t involve smoochy rescues by Diego? There was drama in Dora’s life too, and the occasional bad actor like Swiper the fox. Even Barbie looks like a suffragette compared to Disney’s Belle. So what’s the appeal of the pink tulle Princess cult?</p>
<p>Seen from the witchy end of the female life cycle, the Princesses exert their pull through a dark and undeniable eroticism. They’re sexy little wenches, for one thing. Snow White has gotten slimmer and bustier over the years; Ariel wears nothing but a bikini top (though, admittedly, she is half fish.)  In faithful imitation, the three-year old in my life flounces around with her tiara askew and her Princess gown sliding off her shoulder, looking for all the world like a London socialite after a hard night of cocaine and booze. Then she demands a poison apple and falls to the floor in a beautiful swoon. Pass the Rohypnol-laced margarita, please.</p>
<p>It may be old-fashioned to say so, but sex – and especially some middle-aged man’s twisted version thereof – doesn’t belong in the pre-K playroom. Children are going to discover it soon enough, but they’re got to do so on their own.</p>
<p>There’s a reason, after all, why we’re generally more disgusted by sexual abusers than adults who inflict mere violence on children: We sense that sexual abuse more deeply messes with a child’s mind. One’s sexual inclinations – straightforward or kinky, active or passive, heterosexual or homosexual – should be free to develop without adult intervention or manipulation. Hence our harshness toward the kind of sexual predators who leer at kids and offer candy. But Disney, which also owns ABC, Lifetime, ESPN, A&amp;E and Miramax, is rewarded with $4 billion a year for marketing the masochistic Princess cult and its endlessly proliferating paraphernalia.</p>
<p>Let’s face it, no parent can stand up against this alone. Try to ban the Princesses from your home, and you might as well turn yourself in to Child Protective Services before the little girls get on their Princess cell phones. No, the only way to topple royalty is through a mass uprising of the long-suffering serfs. Assemble with your neighbors and make a holiday bonfire out of all that plastic and tulle! March on Disney World with pitchforks held high!</p>
<p><a href="http://sharethis.com/item?publisher=1399db84-5182-4b85-8448-9a202aad7056&title=Bonfire+of+the+Princesses&url=http%3A%2F%2Fparentics.com%2F2007%2F12%2F12%2Fbonfire-of-the-princesses%2F">ShareThis</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://parentics.com/2007/12/12/bonfire-of-the-princesses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gap Kids: New Frontiers in Child Abuse</title>
		<link>http://parentics.com/2007/11/29/gap-kids-new-frontiers-in-child-abuse/</link>
		<comments>http://parentics.com/2007/11/29/gap-kids-new-frontiers-in-child-abuse/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:14:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Barbara Ehrenreich</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child labor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child slavery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gap Kids]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martha Hansen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[slavery]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://parentics.com/gap-kids-new-frontiers-in-child-abuse/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Barbara Ehrenreich comments on the scandal at Gap Kids, who was caught using forced child labor in an Indian sweatshop.

<script type="text/javascript">
SHARETHIS.addEntry({
	title: "Gap Kids: New Frontiers in Child Abuse",
	url: "http://parentics.com/2007/11/29/gap-kids-new-frontiers-in-child-abuse/"
});
</script>
	]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was enough to make you vomit all over your new denim jacket. The Gap has been caught using child labor in an Indian sweatshop, and not just child labor&#8211;child slaves. As extensively reported on the news, the children, some as young as ten, were worked 16 hour days, fed bowls of mosquito-covered rice, and forced to sleep on a roof and use over-flowing latrines. Those who slowed down were beaten with rubber pipes and the ones who cried had oily cloths stuffed in their mouths.<span id="more-21"></span></p>
<p>But let’s try to look at this dispassionately – not as a human rights issue but as a PR disaster, ranking right up there with the 1982 discovery of cyanide in Tylenol capsules. Think of this as a case study in a corporate Crisis Communication course: How is The Gap handling the problem, and could it do better?</p>
<p>This is not the first time The Gap has been caught using child labor, but CEO Martha Hansen went on the air to state that the situation was “completely unacceptable” and that the company would “act swiftly.” Two problems here: One, she failed to detail the actions. It would have been nice, for example, if she had announced that some of the top-producing child slaves would be reassigned to manage Gap outlets in American malls, and that the under-performers would be adopted by Angelina Jolie.</p>
<p>The other, more serious, problem is that she got defensive about child labor. This is the mistake Kathie Lee Gifford made in 1996. When accused of using child labor in Honduras to manufacture her Kathie Lee line of clothing, Gifford broke into tears on TV. Maybe Hansen meant to cover herself by saying that The Gap would not “ever, ever condone any child laborer making our garments” rather than saying the company does not condone child labor itself. We already knew, from the rubber pipes and oily cloths, that The Gap does not condone much from its child laborers.</p>
<p>Hansen underestimated the potential support for a full-throated defense of child labor. More and more American children are tried and punished as adults today. And the ubiquitous conservative pundit William Kristol will surely be enthusiastic, considering his recent – though possibly facetious&#8211; statement that “whenever I hear anything described as a heartless assault on our children<strong>,</strong> I tend to think it&#8217;s a good idea.”</p>
<p>The core of the argument, though, is that anyone who opposes child labor has not witnessed its opposite, which is child unemployment and idleness.</p>
<p>Hansen claims to be a mother herself, but I wonder how often she has returned home from a hard day in the C-suites to find her unemployed offspring Magic Marker-ing the walls and crushing the Froot Loops into the carpet. This is what jobless children do: They rub Crazy Glue into their siblings’ hair; they spill apple juice onto your keyboard. Believe me, I see this kind of wantonly destructive behavior every day. Vandalism is a way of life for unemployed children, and they do not know the meaning of remorse.</p>
<p>In fact, corporate America should go further and make a strong statement against the sickening culture of dependency that has grown up around childhood. Why are jobless children so criminally inclined? Because they know that whatever damage they inflict, the Froot Loops will just keep coming. The Gap should portray its child-staffed factories as part of a far-seeing welfare-to-work program, which will eventually be extended to American children as well.</p>
<p>To appeal to American parents, our own child factories should be run more like Montessori schools, where the children are already encouraged to regard every one of their demented activities as “work.” If they’re going to pile up blocks and knock them down all day, then why not sew on buttons and bring home a little cash? But even American families will have to brace themselves for the inevitable cost cutting measures. First the cookies and milk may have to go, then, as in India, the toilets and beds. Wal-Mart has already pioneered the price-cutting defense of human rights abuses, and The Gap should follow suit.</p>
<p>The company can of course expect some lingering opposition. Just as there are vegetarians and pacifists, there will always be some men, for example, who would rather wear skirts than blue jeans impregnated with the excrement and tears of ten-year-olds. Well, let them shop at American Apparel or some other “sweat-free” vendor, and if they can’t find anything there, let them wear dhotis. In a nation that cannot bring itself to extend child health insurance (SCHIP) to all children in need, child-made clothes make a fine fashion statement. And why not accessorize your denim jacket with a scarf derived from one of those oily cloths stuffed in weeping workers’ mouths?</p>
<p><a href="http://sharethis.com/item?publisher=1399db84-5182-4b85-8448-9a202aad7056&title=Gap+Kids%3A+New+Frontiers+in+Child+Abuse&url=http%3A%2F%2Fparentics.com%2F2007%2F11%2F29%2Fgap-kids-new-frontiers-in-child-abuse%2F">ShareThis</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://parentics.com/2007/11/29/gap-kids-new-frontiers-in-child-abuse/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
