I liked the other stuff. Do you not find having a pretty face on the cover objectifying? Isn't that what we're complaining about? There's more to us than looks.

;)

The girl is not on the cover because she's pretty; she's there because she won the 2015 Google Science Fair Grand Prize.

I understand. Do you see the boys' cover? I find the focus very different. I find the remodeled cover girl highly admirable. That's not the problem.

Agree....We can and need to do better!

Magazines don't raise children and set examples, parents do.

A young girl whose mother and father are employed or otherwise active doing substantive things, who go to the gym or play tennis/softball/soccer/whatever instead of meeting friends to gossip, who read Scientific American or business/professional journals instead of People and Cosmo, who read the NY Times and not the National Enquirer, and who teach and set an example that what's inside is what matters and not what's outside......such a girl will not be interested in that magazine.

My kids (and we by extension) knew many girls over the years whose parents (mothers especially) were simply awful role models. The outcome as troubled young adults or failures to launch for many of these girls was no surprise. And to the contrary, many of those who had the right role models and the right guidance have been extremely successful in their educational pursuits and in the substantive careers embarked on.

Wow, I thought you were going to show us photos of 50-year-old covers. I find the difference disgusting!!

Boys' Life is put out by the Boy Scouts of America. Many Scouts subscribe to Boys' Life. Girls Life appears to be just another magazine which is 3/4 advertising and 1/4 information which could be worthwhile or not. They are not comparable in any way.

Good point, Socks.

Do you see the boys' cover? I find the focus very different.

The Boys' Life cover is rather unfocused; it has a lot of stuff on it. I find the photo of the girl more appealing. There's no right or wrong here--we simply have differing opinions. But based on the number of women's magazines that feature women on the cover, I would say the marketing people have found a lot of readers share my opinion. :-)

Magazines do give credence to what peers say. Parents are but one input. Pubescent girls see this crap and do doubt mom/dad...they see Hollywood and their gut doubts and decides moms love ya so say all sorts of "lies" where looks and charm are concerned. I agree we need to do better, but to do that we need to be of one mind on our goals for our girls and from what I read we are sooo not there. The magazins exist because there are THOUSANDS of moms who see that first cover and say "ooo a new lipstick". Collectively we are a girls worst enemy.

A loooong time ago, I subscribed to Boys' Life. At the time, it was geared more to younger boys, I got it because it had some good things about scouting. Times change.

I think we're looking at it differently alisande. I see the boys' cover as focused on motivating them to do something great with their minds and the girls cover is focused, still, on looks with her cutie pie face. Her name badge doesn't offset that you have to search the picture to find what it says, but her eyes are smiling back at you first. Why can't we focus on our minds and abilities too? Like the guys?

:)

The Girls' Life cover is focused on looks? Her "cutie pie face"? All I can say is you and I must be very, very different, Rob.

Nothing wrong with her. She's particularly awesome! On that we agree alisande.

"I also hope change takes place so that 'attractive' females should not
have to hide, downplay their looks or be disinterested in their
appearance or fashion in order to be taken seriously or to be considered
smart or recognized for their intelligence."

Sure, I agree. But this all depends on how such individuals present themselves and what they emphasize and give prominence to in dealing with people directly. In my experience, the percentage of women with above average looks or prominent physical attributes who themselves give priority to their appearance is very, very high and that sets the tone for how others deal with them. They can become the caricature they wish to avoid. Men and women alike react similarly to such people.

Again, from my experience, this is rarely a close call. Those lacking substance are obvious. Those who want to be treated for who they are, as it should be and as you describe, have the opportunity to direct the reactions of others because by their own actions and tone they can set the terms of conduct others will usually follow.

I almost agree with you elmer. You'd be surprised how far unwarranted first impressions go, that are really difficult to overcome. I find it baffling how people can assume something about you from across a room without having spoken to you?!, but it happens. Regardless of what one is wearing (makeup, clothes, etc.) and how one carries themselves. Sad, but true. In this day and age, we shouldn't have to overcome some ridiculous obstacle as appearance (and men have less problem with this, not none, but less), but we do.

I'm putting a tickmark in the EF Win column

Who puts more emphasis on how a woman looks though? Men or women?

In my experience, it is women doing it to themselves.

How many times have there been conversations and discussions on this very board about coloring hair, makeup, beauty regimens, etc. I can't say I've ever seen men having these kinds of discussions.

If we want young women to focus on the content of their character instead of the vanity of their looks, perhaps we should model that behavior for them ourselves.

It's a complicated issue, and everyone has their own story. Texas_Gem, I realize you brought up the KT beauty discussions as a general example, but I feel the need to defend us a bit. Many of KT women are older, and I'm probably one of the oldest. When my children were growing up, I never went to a hair salon (still don't go very often) and never talked about makeup or wore it--not because I was trying to set an example for my daughters, but because I was much more interested in other things. But at a certain age--long after my kids were grown--I began to think differently about makeup. A certain amount of makeup makes me look better, at least in my eyes. I'll bet a lot of the KT women feel the same way. And women aren't the only ones who want to look their best sometimes.

Later this month I'll participate in a poetry reading launching a book I'm in. I could go without makeup, and tell myself I was invited to be in the book because my poems are good, and they'll go over well at the reading because I have a great voice. It's true--I do. But that great reading voice just might sound a tad better if its source is wearing lipstick and a little eye makeup.

TG nails it.

It's really not complicated at all.

Than I guess you'll be busy filling up the EF Win column. :-)

Mine was a tongue-in-cheek comment for having a view approaching rob's

Alisande- You said a certain amount of makeup makes you feel you look better and that a lot of the KT women probably feel the same and I would agree. I'm one of them as well. As is every other person who wears makeup, regardless of age.

Indeed the very purpose of makeup is to enhance and make people look better, the question is why we feel we must always look better?

What kind of message do we as a society send to girls when we say, "you should always look better", when they constantly see and hear the women in their lives or in social media, public figures, etc with makeup applied daily, hair colored, etc.

It's the same as girls who end up dieting in their teens. Where did they pick it up? Maybe from hearing mom always talking about trying to lose a few pounds or seeing tabloids talking about the latest star who has gained weight or overhearing someone comment on another girl or woman.

If there is a man reading a poem as well, it's a shame he can't make his voice a tad better by having lipstick and eye makeup on.

For what it's worth, I think your poem would sound wonderful even if you didn't wear makeup. It must be good if it is being included in a book. Congratulations!

Elmer, of course I knew it was tongue-in-cheek. I thought it was funny.

Texas, I'll read your post after I shower and eat. I just finished babysitting, and I'm starving. I'm also dirty and sweaty, and haven't worn makeup in days. :-)

You're a silly Elmer

If there is a man reading a poem as well, it's a shame he can't make his voice a tad better by having lipstick and eye makeup on.

I'll let you know if I observe anything like that at the reading. LOL But I was thinking of confidence gained, probably not actually affecting my voice.

I Googled Why do people want to look good? and got many hits, including several that seem like they'd be worth reading. I didn't click on any of them, but the lines displayed on the first result say we want to look good because of self-vanity in the modern era. I would disagree with that because people have been trying to look good for a very long time.

My guess is that the urge is biological. So much of our design is focused on procreation; it makes sense to me that we're given an innate desire to be attractive. It doesn't disappear with menopause (which perhaps blows holes in my theory), but in many if not most cases lasts a lifetime--even if we consciously do not want to attract a mate.

Thanks for the congratulations!

But why does looking good require makeup? That's where I am with this. Men don't do that, why do women?

Totally agree, rob, especially when we talk about children! Looking good is about so much more than caking on makeup. Nice outfit appropriate to whatever you are doing, attractive hair; better yet: cultivating a sincere smile and personal charm...

And frankly, were I a kid now, I'd seriously be picking up the Boy's Life magazine and ignoring the Girl's Life one -- but I was a tomboy...

cultivating a sincere smile and personal charm

If the smile were sincere, I wouldn't think it would have to be cultivated. And all that cultivation seems every bit as artificial as makeup--which no one I know cakes on, BTW.

Men do other things. Beards, for instance. A guy might say he's growing a beard because he's tired of shaving. But beards require maintenance too. The type of beard reflects the look he's going for. Artist? Professor? Mountain man?

Sounds like you don't wear makeup, Rob. That's fine. Maybe someday you'll want to. That will be fine too.

I'm not sure how our discussion got into makeup. The Google Science Fair winner doesn't appear to be wearing any.

If you're going by my avatar, I was swimming. If you mean my answers, I mean society really needs to place its values on looking good just because we are who are. I do wear makeup sometimes, and I don't sometimes, but I don't feel more or less confident when I do? It's appropriate to the occasion. I also fix my hair and wear nice clothes.

But the point was, why don't men wear makeup? If you can get to that answer, maybe you'll understand what I mean with, the boys' magazine emphasizes their minds and the girls' is almost there, but still focuses on outer appearance with the headlines framing the lady being correct. Sure men grow facial hair and fix their hair. And we fix our hair. And? Why don't they wear makeup? They're accepted for being who they are, whatever that is.

Which is how we got on makeup. We need to emphasize our minds as much as men do. Sure, we all want to look great, but it needs to be farther down the list. How we carry ourselves is more than skin deep.

ETA: I know some guys who wear makeup, fingernail polish. And if that floats their boat, more power to them.

If you're going by my avatar, I was swimming.

Are you talking to me, Rob? I never noticed your photo until just now, when you mentioned it. You look good.

Thanks!

As you can see by the rest of my answer, it mirrors what you're talking about, so yes, talking to you.

:)

It's not about looking good, in my opinion, it's about saying how you look isn't good enough.

You need to shave this, dye that, wear this makeup, etc. It's an obsession with how you look isn't good enough.

We don't see professional women who simply shower and dress presentably, or at least I don't think I've ever seen one. Every man I know in a career does that every day and they look good. They make sure they are clean and their clothes fit properly and that is more than enough for them to succeed in business, society, etc.

The women though, they all have hair and makeup done any time they are in public. In order for a woman to be successful, how she looks isn't good enough, she needs to be better!

Does any of that make sense?

As kids, most little girls love to play dress up. Somewhere along the way, it seems a lot of them stop playing dress up and feel they MUST dress that way to conform to societal standards of beauty.

For me at least, on the rare occasions I wear makeup, I tell my girls that I'm dressing up for fun, just like they do sometimes but that it certainly isn't necessary and I never say, "to look pretty" I emphasize that it is for fun only.

I'm not sure what this conversation is about anymore but here is an interesting article on makeup and how women are perceived by strangers relative to their appearance and how much makeup they are wearing.

I don’t think makeup has anything to do with whether a woman has developed her mind or not, or which she places more importance or value on. There are many reasons for wearing it. None of them should be 'wrong'. A woman's appearance does affect how others perceive her, however. But the observer owns their own values, perceptions and judgments.

NY Times article, Harvard run study:

"

WANT more respect, trust and affection from your co-workers?

Wearing makeup — but not gobs ofGaga-conspicuous makeup — apparently can help. It increases people’s perceptions of a woman’s likability, her competence and (provided she does not overdo it) her trustworthiness, according to a new study, which also confirmed what is obvious: that cosmetics boost a woman’s attractiveness.

It has long been known that symmetrical faces are considered more comely, and that people assume that handsome folks are intelligent and good. There is also some evidence that women feel more confident when wearing makeup, a kind of placebo effect, said Nancy Etcoff, the study’s lead author and an assistant clinical professor of psychology at Harvard University (yes, scholars there study eyeshadow as well as stem cells). But no research, till now, has given makeup credit for people inferring that a woman was capable, reliable and amiable.

..... "

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/13/fashion/makeup-makes-women-appear-more-competent-study.html

"I'm not sure what this conversation is about anymore"

This conversation was and is about how women view themselves, and why it's necessary for women to please other women or men. What's been added to the mix are people who think it's perfectly fine to say that women should accept that makeup is required (lest she be thought of as unlikable or incompetent) or preferred.

Hope that helps!

What I have noticed is that no one, and I mean no one, has said why men don't wear makeup. They too have asymmetrical faces. So? Why can they have asymmetrical faces and not be expected to wear makeup to "look better"?

I'm dying to hear from the "other side" why men get away with not wearing it. I'm ready to accept a reasonable answer.

This conversation was and is about how women view themselves, and why it's necessary for women to please other women or men.

Um, no. If you go back to my original post, the conversation was about a certain publication's perception of girls and what interests them, and perhaps the influence of the media in general. It had nothing to do with women pleasing other women or men, and it had nothing to do with makeup.

And I don't think anyone here (certainly not I) stated that it's perfectly fine to say women should accept that makeup is required or preferred.

Interesting study, Snookums--thanks!

My apologies.

The person who originally posted it, had in mind for girls to break free from the body conscious mold.

Anyone saying, or agreeing with the makeup stuff is fine, puts the body conscious mold back on girls. Is that better stated?

Rob, I am not on the 'other side', if that is
what you are inferring from my post.

Men also concern themselves with their looks and attractiveness but in different ways (often 'unbecoming' to a woman). So it's all the same. They get judged, criticized and are subjected to expectations too.

'What I have noticed is that no one, and I mean no one, has said why men don't wear makeup. They too have asymmetrical faces. '

Let's see, a man who wears makeup ... they
have another can of worms to deal with in our society.

As far as symmetrical faces being perceived as more attractive, that applies to both men and women. Human nature. Even babies have been shown to react to 'attractive' faces more favorably than to 'unattractive' faces.

I do think it's all very complicated. The intertwining influences of society, history, basic human nature and unique individuals is always a complex multi-faceted tangle, with illogical, even seemingly irrational, emotions involved.

Biology, cultural evolution and influences, basic human nature play a big and natural part in any society, their practices and norms.

'Here the young Wodaabe men, with elaborate make-up, feathers and other adornments, perform the Yaake: dances and songs to impress marriageable women. The male beauty ideal of the Wodaabe stresses tallness, white eyes and teeth; the men will often roll their eyes and show their teeth to emphasize these characteristics. Wodaabe clans then join for the remainder of the week-long Gerewol: a series of barters over marriage and contests where the young men's beauty and skills are judged by young women.'

Mother nature at work:

'The peacock is one of the natural world's most elaborate and showy males, mustering its physical resources to wow potential mates with its enormous and gaudy, fan-like tail plumage.'

'Bowerbirds ... are renowned for their unique courtship behaviour, where males build a structure and decorate it with sticks and brightly coloured objects in an attempt to attract a mate.'

' In courtship the male bowerbird will dance to the female in an attempt to attract her. '

Yes, many parents I've seen and known (giving poor guidance and setting poor examples for their kids) and also the cluelessness I've seen from many women with inappropriate dress and conduct in business and professional settings suggest these people are definitely bird-brained.

The problem is not the magazine. The magazine is a symptom of the problem which is a societal one.

Placing emphasis on how a female looks instead of who she is or what she contributes, something a large number of women do to themselves and help perpetuate.

A look beyond the meme.

http://www.snopes.com/girls-life-vs-boys-life-magazine-covers/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Humans of both sexes have been utilizing some sort of ornamentation for their bodies for thousands of years. Specifically, cosmetics have been used by both sexes for thousands of years all over the world; it's really silly to criticize the wearing of it. I mean, how far back do we go to lay some sort of blame? And why?

I think the real issue is the objectification, marginalization, and stupidization (do you like my word?) of young girls. That's the discussion worth having.

I agree rhizo. It's not about makeup; my point was merely to show how adorning (my original typo said adoring. Hm. Good point!) the body shouldn't be what we tell our children about. It's about the script the children are being handed to live. It's about how societal values are being fed to them. And the information one child gets the other should too. Girls can do anything boys can do. For that matter, boys can do anything the girls can do. There should be no gender roles. We should be free to live without harsh judgements imposed on us. Getting to that worthwhile discussion requires a mutual understanding of where to start. Doesn't look to happen.

My thoughts, too, watchme, on the meme. Thanks for the link.

Hey, if discussions moved beyond hot topic
memes, that would be a huge improvement.

Good points from the linked article, regarding juxtaposing the Fall fashion issue of GL against a Boy Scout magazine:

‘The Girls' Life cover is a sample size of one. While this particular cover appears to encourage teens and tweens to focus on their looks at the expense of everything else (and to tacitly say that being pretty is the only important thing) at first glance, a closer look at the magazine's web site quickly shows that previous issues bore covers focusing on stories about body acceptance, getting jobs, and dealing with bullies (and how not to be one) tucked amid pieces on fashion and celebrity gossip.’

‘Karen Bokram is the founding editor and publisher of Girls' Life magazine. She told us that the outcry seems to stem from adults placing their own expectations and pressure on young people. She says that by the time girls are reading her magazine, they're already receiving mixed messages about what they're supposed to be (and with additional pressure from their peers to fit in), which is in part what her magazine is trying to help them navigate:

I put this stuff in there, and once I point it out, people say — okay fine, you have a lot of high quality content, but you still should have it on the cover! And I'm like, okay, so we're shaming girls for having interests that aren't aligned with what you think they should be interested in? So getting good grades and making friends — which is on my cover — isn't within your wheelhouse? ‘

Amusing Elmer thinks Mother Nature is not too
bright - just another bird brained female.

I didn't understand why you thought pictures of birds contributed to a discussion of the failures of parents which, along with confusing signals in American popular culture, give unclear or inappropriate guidance to young females. My comment was sarcastic.

Thanks to Alisande for bringing this interesting topic to our attention.