My response proved too lengthy and link-heavy for responding in the comment field of his original post, so:
Thank you for encouraging discussion;
it's definitely one worth having, and one that exists both on and
offline. (I'd be happy to share links if you're interested?) I'd
argue the male side of the coin is less visible in part because of
the standards imposed by both cultural figures (i.e.: "girls are
emotional, men are stoic") but no less there.
I went back, originally, to revise "men"
to "boys" in that statement - in the sense of the word
pairs "girls and boys" vs. "men and women", but
maybe it's a fitting slip; toys and pop culture project a youthful
girlishness on women, where even boys are expected to be resourceful,
mature, and - as He-Man illustrates - built. Heavy expectations.
Back to those standards: by encouraging
women to be emotional and expressive, dialogue formed around the toys
we grew up with and are now given the option to share with our
children/future generations. Unless we're subscribing to a Liefeld
model of anatomy, Barbie is unrealistic, yet she's also an
interesting starting point for toys with a more positive outlook:
recent examples include makers who have created new dolls with more
realistic proportions, or the almost instantaneous unofficial rewrites of the "Barbie: Computer Programmer" book where,
in the original, she proceeds to break her computer and lets her guy
friends fix it. Those are pretty good things to come out of a
"crisis." We're also seeing more indie toy companies on the
market as a response to this demand, with products that are often
appealing to both genders and build on creative and problem-solving
skills (Make magazine recently covered a lot of these in their "Best Toys for Makers" issue, and they look
awesome.)
"Girl toys" are also an
easier target because they're overwhelmingly pink. There's a visual
accord that's easier to pick up on and write about, where the rows in
the toy store historically attributed to guys tends to have more
variety: action figures, and video games, yes, but also board games,
Magic cards, Lego, RC cars, scientist kits... Some see the variety
available and go "well, it's not perfect, but it's definitely
better," and stop there.
Because Barbie is made in a very
specific image, and despite her many careers, a pretty shallow one,
it's easier to move past her. Conversely, male heroes are drawn with
more nuance, so their shadow is harder to emerge from, or notice its
effects. Most wouldn't actually want to be Batman/Iron Man (despite
the shirts stating the contrary) because their lives suck when you
think about it, but these men are and do everything, which is nearly
impossible to measure up to. In the words of the Avengers themselves:
Captain America: Big man, in a suit of
armour… take that away, what are you?
Iron Man: Uh… a genius, billionaire,
playboy, philanthropist.
On my best day, I'm only one of those
(for better or worse, the last one) and either way, those are some
big shoes to even want to aim towards. Add to that, if it wasn't
enough, the physical attractiveness of these heroes: Thor's actor is
this year's Sexiest Man Alive, too. There's a reason that men's
skincare/cosmetics is one of the fastest growing retail fields out
there. I've supported friends and mentored kids I volunteer with
who've struggled with these images in contrast with their own, and
feeling like they didn't measure up. I know that having caring,
adventurous, and intelligent family, teachers, and friends helped to
shape who I wanted to become; hopefully, I'm passing a bit of that
on.
TL;DR?
I think that we, as a society, are
still working past the "man up, it's just a
picture/toy/whatever" mentality when it comes to self-image and
pop culture aimed at boys. We'll see more discussion, and hopefully,
positive growth along these lines in the near future. In the
meanwhile, it's up to us to make the difference we can in tiny if
constructive ways.
music of the moment: golden boy
.jpg)