Asian Carp: 'Nice Try, Suckers'
Mariotti's Photo Scuffle?
Extra, Extra
Reappointment For Daley's Nephew
Chicagoist believes there’s no glory in picking a fight with a bunch of little girls—and fictional ones at that. But apparently the Chicago-based Pro-Life Action League disagrees.
The group has announced their plans to picket the American Girl stores because of its connection with Girls, Inc. The organization runs programs that help prevent teen pregnancy, promote literacy, avoid drugs, and develop self-esteem and leadership. Sounds good to us.
So what’s PLAL’s problem? Well, the site also believes that young women should have access to information on birth control and abortion. They’re also upset because, according to Michnews.com, they believe the group “favors lesbian and bi-sexual practices.”
What’s American Girl’s connection to all this? They offer a bracelet for sale as part of their “I Can” campaign. The bracelets sell for a dollar and seventy cents of every dollar goes to Girls, Inc. programs. Unless American Girl agrees to stop donating money to Girls, Inc., in the next two weeks, the PLAL has promised to stage a boycott and picket the American Girl stores in Chicago and New York.
As you might imagine, Chicagoist has some problems with this.
To paraphrase an old Elayne Boosler joke: Chicagoist took four years of algebra and we never do math. Having information on birth control doesn’t encourage sex. And don’t get us started on encouraging ignorance about sexual health in general.
Also, if the money from the sale of these bracelets was going toward Girls Inc. programs like “5 Easy Steps To Becoming A Lesbian” or “EZ Abortions Inc.”, we’d concede that PLAL has a right to be upset (we might still disagree with their thesis but hey it’s a free country). But the money from these bracelets is only going to Girls Inc.’s programs that encourage leadership; science, math and technology education; and athletic skills. No donations are made to programs dealing with sexual health or orientation. Apparently, PLAL thinks it’d be better for young women to be lost, dumb and lazy.
Plus, while Girls, Inc. does believe that young women should have access “to community resources for dealing with issues of sexual orientation” that’s about the only reference to the subject on their site outside of a book list. Saying that they’re "pro-lesbian" is like saying Chicagoist is "pro-rectal vegetable intrusions" just because of one Overheard post.
But we do have to give the PLAL credit for not just complaining about a problem, but also offering a solution that’s just as creepy and filled with faux empowerment as the American Girls series.
The PLAL has created its own line of faux female empowerment characters called A Life Of Faith. The books seem tailor-made for a Robert Altman screen treatment as all the girls seem to be interrelated. Their flagship character is Elsie, whose daughter is Violet, who is cousin to Millie, who is friends with Laylie.
The only thing is…doesn’t Elsie look a little um, old? If she’s a girl then Chicagoist is still in college. And isn’t it glossing over the issue of slavery to say that their African-American character Laylie has problems “dealing with discrimination?”
Thank goodness the PLAL picked such a slow Chicago news day to make their announcement or we’d have never heard about this.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Lost, Dumb and Lazy is no way to go through life...
Those Life of Faith girls are such copyright infringements on the American Girls, too. Everything from the visual images to the character descriptions. Ridiculous.
That thing looks too much like an Astros logo -- no good!
Informed buyers start your engines!! I have the same reaction as Mr.Smith, what's the problem!
Maybe it's Pro Life's history of using inconsiderate methods which turns people off to them right away! (I guess we have to let them have their say too.)
If they feel compelled to save us from ourselves they could learn to peacefully hand out factual, nonbiased information to store patrons about Girl,Inc. for a change.(Leave those god-awful mangled fetus pictures at home--thank you!)
So if I am reading this right, freedom of speech OK when you agree with the speaker, but no good when you disagree.
JBP
I don't think the author is saying that PLAL does not have the right to picket. It seems like the article is saying that their beef with American Girl Place is just misguided, which is definitely is.
Does the author run the PLAL? Does he make descions for them? What are his qualms with the PLAL? None of these are addressed in his post.
The PLAL is 100% pro-life. The Girl's Inc people are not. So the PLAL does not support Girl's Inc. Where is the misguidance? Please contact Senator Obama and tell me why this is "Silly".
JBP
John:
A) Obviously, I don't run the PLAL. My qualms with them are stated clearly above.
B) I don't use the word "silly" above but OK. Girls, Inc. isn't exclusively pro-choice or pro-life. They're about making sure girls have choices, information and knowledge. If the PLAL doesn't support Girls, Inc. then fine. No one's asking them to. But it's disingenuous for them to shame American Girl for supporting an organization that does good works esp. since the basis for their criticism is invalid (another issue I address above). I'm not against their right to object but I disagree with the basis for their objection.
As for contacting Senator Obama, it appears he shares our views so he doesn't need us to chime in.
Thanks for reading.
Mr. Smith:
First, Could you back up your statement that "The PLAL has created its own line of faux female empowerment characters called A Life of Faith"? From what I have been able to determine, these two organizations are not related. The Life of Faith dolls are suggested as an alternative to AG dolls on the PLAL website, but so are dolls from two other companies. I think it also needs to be clarified that these other dolls were in existence long before the AG/Girls, Inc. controversy.
Second, you are either being disingenuous or naive when you say the AG donations are earmarked for Girls, Inc. programs that have nothing to do with activities that sparked the boycott. Surely, you must know how that works. Ever heard of the hard money/soft money scam in political campaigns? Same thing here. Even if Girls, Inc. does faithfully apply the funds to the activities for which they were earmarked, they can easily at the same time be taking money they had previously budgeted for those areas and using it to fund the objectionable activities.
Third, you say Girls, Inc. does a lot of good for girls, so we should overlook the things they do that we object to. Did you realize that only .05% of rat poison is actually toxic to mice? The other 99.95% is good food. Should we ignore the toxic activities because the organization may do some good things? I don't think so. And, aside from the things you mentioned that many of us find objectionable, there is a message board where advice is given to girls by Girls, Inc. staff. Check out this link to one such response.
http://209.43.123.41/messageboards/showthread.php?s=4c3fad9449dd626bb4a1c2867bc53b01&threadid=4590
Keep in mind that the Girls, Inc. normally has no idea of the age of the girl to whom they are giving advice, nor do they ask.
Fourth, the president of Girls, Inc., made the following statement on their website:
"Recently, our mission to help girls develop their self-esteem and self-reliance has become the target of false, inflammatory statements from people who are pursuing a narrow political agenda."
I'm sorry, but I take offense at the labeling as a "narrow political agenda" my concern that my daughter will wander onto a site that exposes her to things that are inappropriate for her age and espouses values different than our own. The president also doesn't point out which statements are false. As far as I have been able to determine, all the statements I have heard made about the organization are true.
It was a very sad day for my daughter and me when we found out the American Girl Company decided to support Girls, Inc.