One thought on “The Little Girl from the 1981 LEGO Ad is All Grown Up, and She’s Got Something to Say”
have to be honest, this comment has nothing to do with the above post, I just had no idea how to post something else without commenting on something. My post is about the story we had to read for class today (2.19.14). In it, the mother character is recounting her experiences with her daughter. The most striking part of the story is when the mother talks about her daughter’s crush. I think that this moment serves as an allegorical representation of the inequality of the sexes in heterosexual relationships. The daughter is not only stealing from her mother, but she is lusting after the boy’s attention. Her amoral behavior (stealing) coupled with her lustfulness just goes to show how much a women has to do in a relationship. And after all of her work, the boy is still interested in “Jennifer” (ie. not the little girl whom we have become attached to). This seemingly innocuous moment in her daughter’s life is actually representative of the perils that women face when trying to enter into a relationship with a man. They are expected to be the givers, not the receivers. They provide a home (ie. maintenance) and raise the children (these generalizations are just a couple of the things expected from women. So it is telling when a young girl is forced to do all of the work in the “relationship”, or lack thereof. Which brings me to another point; while women have to do all of the work, it is the man who decides whether or not to cast the women aside. The power structure of heterosexual relationships is SO wacky, SO stilted. Why aren’t women screaming from their roof tops about this? It’s just plain ridiculous.
Contemporary Conversations in Feminisms 
have to be honest, this comment has nothing to do with the above post, I just had no idea how to post something else without commenting on something. My post is about the story we had to read for class today (2.19.14). In it, the mother character is recounting her experiences with her daughter. The most striking part of the story is when the mother talks about her daughter’s crush. I think that this moment serves as an allegorical representation of the inequality of the sexes in heterosexual relationships. The daughter is not only stealing from her mother, but she is lusting after the boy’s attention. Her amoral behavior (stealing) coupled with her lustfulness just goes to show how much a women has to do in a relationship. And after all of her work, the boy is still interested in “Jennifer” (ie. not the little girl whom we have become attached to). This seemingly innocuous moment in her daughter’s life is actually representative of the perils that women face when trying to enter into a relationship with a man. They are expected to be the givers, not the receivers. They provide a home (ie. maintenance) and raise the children (these generalizations are just a couple of the things expected from women. So it is telling when a young girl is forced to do all of the work in the “relationship”, or lack thereof. Which brings me to another point; while women have to do all of the work, it is the man who decides whether or not to cast the women aside. The power structure of heterosexual relationships is SO wacky, SO stilted. Why aren’t women screaming from their roof tops about this? It’s just plain ridiculous.