mom-tings - Tumblr blog

mom-tings · 4 years

Text

Let’s talk about books, baby! Let’s talk about A-Z! Let’s talk about all the good reads and the bad reads that may be!

This is a genuine question, so please, my fellow caregivers, help me out. Are bedtime stories still a thing? Do people still go to Chapters? Are physical books gonna be a thing of the past by the time I have grandchildren? Should I be preserving my novels to pawn them when I get old?

The reason why I have come to you in such a frantic manner is because, although I haven’t totally forgotten, I realized that reading is kinda super important… especially for children. This “revelation” (if you can even call it that) comes after having read the article “Take a Look: An Oral History of Reading Rainbow” by: Jake Rossen. In the article, Rossen talks about Reading Rainbow, which was a television show aired during the summer months which encouraged kids to read. The argument here is that during summer break, kids lose some of their reading comprehension skills, which consequently makes teachers readjust their schedules in September to fill in the gaps. The show featured a host, LeVar Burton, who read children’s books aloud and expanded on the themes mentioned in the stories. The show first aired in 1983, and was broadcast until 2009. It began, as mentioned, due to the fact that children were losing literacy skills over the summer, distracted by warm weather and televisions. My argument, somewhat aligning with that of Rossen’s, is that while an initiative such as Reading Rainbow is needed now more than ever, similar endeavours exist, just in different forms. Thus, the quotation that stood out for me the most in the text was quite a simple one, which is, “I don’t think enough children’s programming has followed Reading Rainbow’s lead. There is nothing more important in education than reading. We must continue to make it foundational to the educational process (Rossen, 2017).”

While I agree with Rossen in that there is not enough children’s programming following in Reading Rainbow’s legacy, I do think other media forms have followed suit. As mentioned, Reading Rainbow stopped broadcasting in 2009, and since then, it’s my belief that a technology other than televisions has since become the primary authority of children’s media: portable tablets. With that in mind, I personally think that while children’s media does not ‘romanticize’ books like Reading Rainbow did, there are many other ways in which children still practice literacy skills. An example of this would be reading-based games.

There are hundreds of websites, games, and other applications that focus on reading and literacy for a variety of ages. For example, PBS kids has a huge selection of reading games on their website, such as “Xavier Riddle and the Secret Museum - Xavier Story Creator.” As part of the scientific research I love to do here on my blog, I played the game.

Screenshot of Xavier’s Story Creator taken by me.

The game begins by asking you to click the picture of a famous author, such as Charles Dickens, in order to create a story similar to one of theirs. There are animated characters on the screen, who discuss what the author’s style was like. They emphasized Dickens’ use of imagination. From there, the characters disappear, and children are left to complete a story in an ad-libs fashion. To do this, however, the children must read the prompt at the bottom of the screen.

Screenshot of Xavier’s Story Creator taken by me.

At the end of the game, children can read the full story they produced and then select a different author’s style to try out. Although I am about 17 years older than the target demographic for this game, I must say it was actually quite enjoyable! I’m sure your little ones would agree.

While I know not all games marketed towards children are as ‘sophisticated’ as this one, these types of games are not difficult to find. As caregivers, we know that children spend much of their free time on devices such as tablets, and it only takes a couple seconds to search ‘reading games’ in an app store. So, if you are like Rossen and are terrified that children aren’t reading books anymore, just know that doesn’t mean they aren’t reading at all. Obviously, books do offer benefits that mobile games lack, but I think it is a disservice to say that children are not reading at all. Rather, I would remove the emphasis on children’s programming specifically, and respond to Rossen by saying: “Children will read if reading is made to be fun, regardless of the media platform.”

That being said, I don’t think you can go wrong with a classic bedtime story… they’re seriously soothing!

P.S. Wanna play the game? Here’s the link!

https://pbskids.org/xavier/games/xavier-story-creator

References

Rossen, J. (2017, May 19). Take a Look: An Oral History of Reading Rainbow. Retrieved from https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/93884/take-look-oral-history-reading-rainbow

0 notes

mom-tings · 4 years

Text

#1 Victory Royale, but for who?

First of all, you absolutely have to stop what you’re doing right now and listen to this song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqRLVFRe9AU&ab_channel=TikTokTunes

Alright, now let’s talk about gaming.

Today, I’m gonna talk about the article titled, “What does a gamer look like? Video games, advertising, and diversity,” by Chess et al. The authors discuss how despite the presence of nonwhite, nonmale individuals who actually play video games and are seen in video game console advertisements, the cultural archetype remains that the “gamer” is a white male. The authors neatly summarize their findings in this quote, “Our content analysis of video game advertisements illustrates that even with the emergence of next-generation systems and shifting landscapes in gaming, there is still a cultural perception of the gamer as white male (Chess et al., 2017, pg. 53).” Now, what does this have to do with children? Well, children are obviously no strangers to videogames, as I’m sure you’ve had to verbally yank a child’s hand off a controller once or twice in your lifetime. Specifically, though, I’d like to talk about children aged 10 and up, as I feel this discussion relates more to them. While the authors discuss nonwhite and/or nonmale gamers, I would like to focus specifically on nonmale gamers. Girl gamers, similar to female anime fans I discussed in a different post, are often met with ridicule and not valued in the community. This can be especially harmful to young girls, who may still be trying to solidify their identities, and have found a home in gaming.

This conversation reminded me of a game that is fairly popular among both children and adults, Fortnite. If you’ve heard the words “chug,” “build,” or “push,” creep their way into a child’s vocabulary, chances are they’ve been playing Fortnite. Fortnite is an online game wherein players up to 100 players battle to be the last person or team alive, and it’s extremely popular among children. However, girls who play Fortnite often have their skills questioned, especially when playing in a team or ‘squad’ with others. In the game, players can play with a squad of their own friends, or be put into ‘matchmaking’ which inserts them into a team of strangers. Girls who get put in a squad full of boys are interrogated about their skill-level, repeatedly asked if they need help, and made fun of, among other things.

To illustrate this point further, when I looked up “Fortnite girl gamer” (as somebody may in order to find a new streamer to watch), the first things that appeared were actually a YouTube video by a white male, titled, “I Got TROLLED by a GIRL GAMER in Fortnite: Battle Royale!” and an article titled “Top 5 Most Skillful and Most Beautiful Female Fortnite Players.” When I looked up “Fortnite boy gamer,” I got a video titled, “14-Year-Old PRO Fortnite Gamer Sceptic | The Next NINJA?” and an article called, “British boy becomes Fortnite millionaire in World Cup tournament.” This speaks volumes about the cultural archetype regarding gamers as discussed by Chess et al. When I explicitly searched for a girl gamer, I got a video produced by a guy, and an article talking about the most beautiful girl gamers. When I explicitly searched for a boy, I got a video about a professional gamer and an article about a boy who won a gaming tournament.

So, as caregivers, what do we do with this information? If nonmale children want to play video games, should we be worried that they’ll be bullied? I’m afraid the answer is not black and white. If our nonmale children wish to play video games such as Fortnite, by all means they should, but as caregivers we should be conscious of the risks. For example, if we hear the child arguing over voice-chat or that they are truly distressed, we may have to intervene.

That being said, I agree with the authors in that the cultural archetype of the gamer needs to change. Not only is it harmful for older, nonmale gamers, but it also disservices younger nonmale gamers who want to get into gaming. So, my friends, keep your ears, eyes, and hearts open, and play on!

References

Chess, S., Evans, N., & Baines, J.J. (2017). What does a gamer look like? Video games, advertising, and diversity. Television & New Media, 18, 1, 37–57 Retrieved from

https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.library.carleton.ca/doi/pdf/10.1177/1527476416643765

0 notes

mom-tings · 4 years

Text

Can we talk about family vlogging?

Buckle up friends, this is gonna be a long one.

Whether you have children of your own, frequently babysit, or have young siblings, I’m sure you’ve recorded a child before for one reason or another. (I am aware that statement sounds creepy, but I assure you it is not meant to be.) For example, have you seen those TikToks of people putting cheese on kid’s heads?! Personally, I have a toddler cousin who is known for doing silly things, like calling her uncle “Grandpa” just because he has grey hair, and I have tonnes of videos of her in my camera roll. But, how did the phenomenon of recording in the household begin, and can it do more harm than good?

Today’s article, then, is called “Recording Intimacy, Reviewing Spectacle: The Emergence of Video in the American Home” by Hannah Spaulding. In this article, Spaulding discusses the discourses around home video-recording technology, and suggests there are two seemingly opposed sides when it comes to the medium: one that saw the tech as a portent of spectacle, and one that embraced it as an apparatus for intimacy. Specifically, she mentions the show America's Funniest Home Videos, where people submitted funny videos they took of their family members. The family with the video that’s rated the most funny receives a cash prize. The show has been around since 1989, and as we know, technology has changed quite a bit since then. I'm going to be talking about this a little bit later, but first I wanted to share a quote that stood out for me in the article. The quote is as follows: “Amateur video’s proponents claimed it as a tool of intimacy that would allow viewers to transform their televisions into personalized sites of private communication and facilitate new connections, bridging space, time, and emotional distance. And its opponents denounced videomaking as a dangerous extension of televisual spectacle, something which promised to destroy authentic experience, colonize memory, damage domestic life, and lead America further into the “society of the spectacle (Spaulding, 2018, pg. 258).” I think this quote is an accurate summary of the article, as it discusses both sides of how people perceive video recording technology in the household.

While reading this article one thing I kept thinking about was family vlogging. If you don't know what family vlogs are, I might go so far as to say that you are lucky. Essentially, family vlogs are when parents record what their life is like with their child or children and upload them on video streaming platforms, primarily YouTube. These channels have increased in number in recent years, primarily because everybody has smartphones with which to make recordings. In these videos, the caregivers show pretty much everything the child does in their day: every meltdown, every meal, every bath, literally everything. The first time I saw a family vlog on YouTube was by a channel that had around 2 million subscribers, and I thought to myself, “Imagine how much money my mom could have made if family vlogging was a thing 20 years ago,” as we have hours and hours of footage of my sister and I playing around the house, going shopping at Toys R Us, etc...

But, this brings about an important concern regarding family vlogs. Such YouTube channels have become increasingly popular over the last 5 years, and many families who partake in vlogging rely on their channels as a primary source of income (this includes: sponsorships, product placement, and other forms of advertisement). Thus, it can make you wonder what families are in it for the ‘right reasons.’ As Spaulding mentions, video-recording in the home can be viewed as either something intimate, or something to make a spectacle out of the family. The same debate then, applies to family vlogging. Personally, I am against family vlogging, and one reason why would be because of what transpired recently with the Stauffer family.

To put it short, the Stauffer’s are a family vlog channel, who adopted a fourth child from China in 2017. The little boy had many issues, including possible brain damage, and though the family initially stated they were not looking to adopt a child with “challenges,” they changed their mind and adopted him anyways (McNeal, 2020). Myka, the mother of the family, uploaded content about him for years, highlighting what it’s like to raise a child who is significantly different from her other three children. In the videos, Myka shared intimate details about the child and his upbringing, and even before they brought him home from China, she had made 27 videos about the adoption process (McNeal, 2020). Undoubtedly, these videos brought the family a significant source of income, as they each have hundreds of thousands of views. In May of 2020, after raising the child for three years, and using him for content, the Stauffer’s announced that they had permanently placed him with another family after unspecified behavioral issues (McNeal, 2020).

Many people on social media were outraged, and saw this as an exaggerated version of what family channels have been doing for ages. There is a running joke about family channels, which is that when their views are down and therefore they aren’t making as much money, they introduce a new child into the family. Of course, this is harmful for a number of reasons.

I like to think of it this way:

Family vlogs need children, children age and become ‘boring,’ so family vloggers get more children.

Many family channels have been criticised not only for that, but also due to the protection of minors. Many such channels focus on babies and toddlers, who are unable to consent. What happens when the child grows up and is able to see videos of them online that have been viewed by millions of people? A more intense critique, then, would be that family vloggers feed into all the (let’s keep it PG) *creeps* that exist on the internet.

That being said, not every family vlog channel is like the Stauffer’s. Some genuinely seem to be families happily posting videos of their everyday lives, supporting Spaulding’s argument that some see recording in the household as intimate. I guess the perspective here would be along the lines of, “I love my kids, if I record and upload this, they will be able to watch it when they grow older. Plus, others can also watch.” Now, that supports another one of Spaulding’s claims, which is that the two sides “opposed” to home videos are actually not opposed at all. That is, a mother for example can want to upload a video of her children both because she loves them and because she wants others to see.

So, if it wasn’t clear enough, I am against family vlogs. I don’t think children should be used as props for monetary gain. That being said, if really you want to record your family and have the videos for memories, you can still “make” family vlogs, but perhaps keep them private. Afterall, I think we can all agree there are some things YouTube just doesn’t need more of.

References

Spaulding, H. (2018). Recording intimacy, reviewing spectacle: The emergence of video in the American home. Television & New Media, 19, 3, 257-273 Retrieved from

https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.library.carleton.ca/doi/10.1177/1527476417710727

McNeal, S. (2020, May 29). A YouTuber Placed Her Adopted Autistic Son From China With A New Family - After Making Content With Him For Years. Retrieved from

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemcneal/myka-stauffer-huxley-announcement

0 notes

mom-tings · 4 years

Text

So… apparently people can’t like things anymore?

The article I have for you all today is a doozy, so stay with me. This one is called, “What we talk about when we talk about bronies,” by: Anne Gilbert. If you don’t know what bronies are (which is surprising considering this is tumblr), they are grown men who are devotees of My Little Pony. Often seen as social misfits due to their non-normative sexuality and masculinity, the fandom is regularly criticised by outsiders. Gilbert emphasizes that this criticism is largely in part due to the highly-gendered nature of children programming, and that such outsider perspectives fail to acknowledge the benefits and pleasures the cartoon can have on the adult male audience.

A quote that stood out for me in the text was, “Participatory culture, including fandom but also produsage, cocreation, and other patterns of convergence, is lauded for its liberating potential, but can privilege young male users with disposable income and technological know-how—the perceived early adopters [...] Fandom, too, is often a gendered proposition, with factions and hierarchies divided such that feminized practices and female fans are kept separate, less valued, or outright ridiculed (Gilbert, 2015, n.p.).” While the text focuses on bronies and how “implicit preconceptions of media consumption, sexuality, masculinity, and children's media contribute to privileging particular fan identities (Gilbert, 2015),” in that bronies are criticized for indulged in a highly-feminized text, I think it is interesting that the author mentions the flip side of the situation, wherein female fans of other texts are scorned, depreciated, and often ignored.

I think it is important, before moving on to my thoughts and an example I find relevant to this discussion, to touch on what participatory culture actually means, and how to identify it in the children we care for. Essentially, participatory culture just means that rather than simply consuming media texts, individuals also produce their own media texts in response. For example, bronies dress up, connect via online and in-person groups to engage in trivia about the show, sing songs from the show, and discuss primary themes from the episodes (Gilbert, 2015, n.p.).

One thing that came to my mind when reading this article was anime. From the few anime shows I’ve seen, I would argue that the majority of them are suitable for children under 13, and are not particularly gendered in the way that My Little Pony is, however, female anime fans are no stranger to ridicule, shaming, and belittling. I wonder, why is that? Specifically, I would like to focus on the anime Naruto. I grew up on Naruto, as did many others my age. Even now, watching the episodes gives me an immense feeling of nostalgia, and I would indeed consider myself a fan. In terms of participatory culture, many fans edit fight scenes and add their own effects and music, produce visual art including the characters, and, of course, cosplay.

Fan art of the character Itachi from Naruto. Retrieved from

https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/965530423/itachi-fan-art-poster-print?ga_order=most_relevant&ga_search_type=all&ga_view_type=gallery&ga_search_query=naruto+art&ref=sr_gallery-1-6&organic_search_click=1&pro=1&frs=1

However, I noticed that other female fans online were receiving hate when they mentioned their interest in the series. Some comments I’ve seen on TikTok and Instagram in particular have said that female anime fans: 1) pretend to like anime to satisfy their boyfriends 2) only like anime because they are crazy obsessed with the fictional male protagonists, or 3) are simply dismissed as fake fans for literally any reason under the sun. That is, for some reason, women and girls are simply not allowed to genuinely like anime. This reminded me of the Gilbert article in that outsiders argue bronies exist for any reason other than genuine enjoyment of My Little Pony, and female anime fans are perceived similarly.

So, as caregivers, what can we do? How can we make children feel safe in their interests? One suggestion would be to embrace the child’s interests, regardless of if it is in something that is highly-gendered in their orientation or not. If they want to paint a picture of their favourite Naruto character, let them. If they want to dress up as a pony, princess, or ninja, let them. And who knows, maybe they’ll end up liking the same anime you watched at their age.

0 notes

mom-tings · 4 years

Text

Disney, we need to talk!

Today’s article in question was interesting, especially as a woman of colour (WOC). It’s called, “She Was a Beautiful Girl and All of the Animals Loved Her: Race, the Disney Princesses, and their Animal Friends,” by: Megan Condis. In this article, Condis discusses the relationships between Disney Princesses and animals, and how this relationship changes if the Princess is a WOC.

One quotation from the text that stood out to me was, “Princesses of color are shown alongside animal ‘sidekicks’ who are portrayed as being of equal stature and importance and with whom they must work in tandem to achieve their aims. While Disney’s definition of princesshood initially seems to be welcoming to girls of all races, it actually sorts its aspirants into different categories (Condis, 2015, p. 39).” I feel this quote succinctly encapsulates the overall argument of the piece, which was, in friendly terms, “Disney treats Princesses of colour like garbage compared to their white counterparts, and this needed to change yesterday.”

In the article, Condis discusses how, while on the surface Disney Princesses seem to be diverse and inclusive, there remains quite a bit of prejudice, racism, and stereotypes if one looks deeper than the surface. An idea I found particularly compelling was that Disney sorts it’s Princesses by: “full humans, not-quite-humans, and nonhumans (Condis, 2015, p. 41),” and that while the Princesses of Colour “might be lovely and good at heart [...] they are shown to be closer to expressing their animal natures than white women are (Condis, 2015, p. 41).” This article honestly made me feel seen, as growing up having watched these Disney movies, I always had a gut feeling that something about them was off (especially when it came to Princess Jasmine and Tiana), but I could never put my finger on it.

The article was written before one of my favourite Disney Princesses, Moana, was introduced, and I couldn’t help but think of her as I read it. As you probably know, Moana is a Polynesian badass who ends up healing her island after it’s struck with blight by going on a journey through the ocean. The animation is beautiful, the soundtrack hits all the right spots, though it’s not perfect. Throughout her voyage, Moana is accompanied by a rooster named Heihei, who, to put it nicely, isn’t the smartest chicken in the coop. Throughout the film, he is shown as oblivious, clumsy, incapable of any semblance of independence, and laughable. However, Condis mentioned that the Princesses of Colour (as opposed to their white counterparts) need to work in tandem with their animals in order to reach a resolution, and this is seen in Moana as well. At the climax of the film (SPOILER ALERT, if you somehow haven’t seen Moana yet… I mean, we’re in a pandemic, get to it!), Heihei risks his life during a battle to help Moana, proving that he wasn’t just a stupid chicken, but also that Moana could not have succeeded without him. (Which, given all the incredibly badass things we’ve seen her do throughout the film, seems unlikely.)

Keep in mind, Moana was released in 2016, 7 years after The Princess and the Frog (which is highly criticized in the article), yet maintains the same harmful message relating to WOC and animals.

As caregivers, I think we could benefit from keeping these notions in mind the next time we watch a Disney film with our little ones. For example, if we happen to be watching Moana with a child, we could tell them, “You know, Moana could have totally done that without Heihei.” Or, to be quite honest, we could just choose other films, as I know Pixar as quite a few amazing ones.

So Disney, what’s good?!

References

Condis, M. (2015). She was a beautiful girl and all of the animals loved her: Race, the Disney princesses, and their animal friends. Gender Forum: An Internet Journal for Gender Studies, 55,n.p. Retrieved from //www.genderforum.org/issues/gender-animals-animality/she-was-abeautiful-girl-and-all-of-the-animals-loved-her-race-the-disney-princesses-and-their-animalfriends/

0 notes