When is enough, enough. Children are off limits!

I woke up early this morning, prepared my cup of coffee with extra cream; turned on the TV to see the weather only to be shocked by the news of the day. No, not Japan, or the Middle East, but Abercrombie & Fitch selling a push up bikini tops for young girls.  My jaw hit the floor.  I was puzzled, why?  I can remember being a retail buyer many, many years ago and how we would sit in the merchandise meeting to present what we felt were potential new trends.  I find it hard to believe that someone placed this child’s push up bikini top on a table and everyone agree that this was going to be the next child’s trend. 

Did they have a discussion about what’s right and what wrong or did they sit with smiles on their face thinking of all the slaves to fashion that will go running out to purchased them and then have their child prance in public with this top on.  Do any of the buyers have children and what was on their mind during this presentation?  I am sure pedophilias will have a new candy store to go to, but its not them that is my concern because they are what they are. I am worried about the young girls that will wear these tops and attract unwarranted attention, which can devalue how they see themselves and their own personal worth.  This is about children who before they can count to 100 will know that they can attract the eyes of others and not know why.  This is nothing short of in your face baby porn.  For once the media got this one right. This is simply sexually objectifying young female children.   When I went to post the link for the blog this is want I found.  Obviously, someone realized that maybe this is not really a good idea. 

It should be noted that Abercrombie Kids has a history of sexualization of children’s fashion.  If you remember a few years ago they promoted thongs for young girls.  When I say young kids, let me be clear, I am talking toddlers. Sadly this one did not disappear as fast of the push up top.  However, I will not place all the blame on Abercrombie, but parents that will go out and purchase this in the name of “the new thing” or “all the kids will be wearing it.” They should be referred to parental counseling classes.  After all you can’t sell what people are not buying.  This is one thing that no parent should be buying but instead they should be picketing any store that promotes any children merchandise that will degrade the value of our youth to mere sexual objects.

Are we as a society so agreeable that seeing an 8 year old with a push up bikini top is to be considered the norm?  Are we to the point of placing all the blame on the media, Internet, and advertising verses being responsible parents? I hope not.

Related articles

• Padded Bras For Seven-Year-Olds (buzzfeed.com)
• "Abercrombie Changes Push-Up Bikini Name Due To Controversy [VIDEO]" and related posts (blogs.babble.com)
• Abercrombie Padded Bikini Top For 8-Year-Olds Angers Parents (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)

What is a parent?

I read a story written by Maria L. La Ganga, about a 34 year old women named Abbie Dorn from Los Angeles.  She gave birth to triplets, and when giving birth, the hospital made some major mistakes resulting in Ms. Dorn becoming a paraplegic.  From the day of their birth, it had been three years since she had seen the children.  The ex-husband Dan Dorn, who resides in Myrtle Beach, feels that it would be damaging for the children to see their mother in her condition.  He would prefer that the children never see their maternal mother or grandmother again.  He feels that the only reason he has to deal with this issue is because the grandmother feels that her daughter has the “Constitution Right” to see the children. 

Ms. Dorn has the ability to occasionally respond by blinking eye signals.  In December 2010 Dan allowed the children to see their mother.  “They tended to her, drew picture for her, they were unafraid of her, “despite the tube and everything else one would find in a hospital room for a patient living in this condition as stated in the article.  They knew she was their mommy.  However, after all this Dan still feels that they children should not be allowed to see Abbie, and that the courts should not grant her visitation rights. 

I found that when the story indicated that the children were loving toward their mother is something greater than what anyone could ever understand.  They did not expect anything only the joy of being with someone that they were told had no signs of life.  I am torn with this story.  I think that some type of relationship should be allowed regardless of the fact that she can do very little.  She is alive, she is their mother, and with the exception of the ex-husband everyone seems to want to try. 

She is not asking for custody but merely visitation rights.  But, in this situation, what would constitute visitation rights. However, no matter the verdict, it may never be apparent that she would be aware of it.  If it were rule against her, would she really be able to understand the judgment, for or against her? Does she the cognitive ability to make sense of the situation?

What are the moral and ethical issues involved with this case?

The Judge Frederick C. Shaller has to make a decision of: Will granting visitation with their mother cause them mental harm because she is a paraplegic?  Does Ms. Dorn have no rights as a parent because of her condition? Can a Judge really make a decision for the true benefit of the children or for the mother? I think the reasoning behind the final verdict will be worth reading.

What’s your view…

Original Story from the LA Times

Related articles

• Judge To Rule if Paralyzed Mom Can See Her Kids (abcnews.go.com)

What is the media's ethical and social responsibility to the public.

   As the world knows, on March 11, 2011 at 2:46 (JST) an 8.9 earthquake struck the island of Japan.  I live in Los Angeles and have felt everything from a 1 to the 6.7 Northridge earthquake.  I have to admit, I can’t even image an 8.9 earthquake, and the fact that it lasted for 5 minutes, "No," I just can’t image it. 

Someone made a statement about the news coverage regarding Japan's massive earthquake and the conversation momentarily evolved around the amount of the media coverage.  Most felt it is too much.  This made me wonder. So, I ask the question: Does the Media have an ethical or social responsibility to not bombard us with the decimation of Japan?

Later that day, a student came to my classroom (actually he was put out of his for behavior) and asked me could he use one of my laptops to see what was happening in Japan.  I asked why?  I wanted to know his “intentions” for watching this footage.  He told me that it is amazing what happened there and he wanted to see the tsunami.  I asked why? I want to see what it did, he said, as I told him to sit down.  I gave him the Internet address to the  Los Angeles Times.  www.latimes.com

I observed him looking at the images; watching him studying them.  I showed him how to search for more information.  We went to www.google.com where he saw the text results.  And, then I clicked images.  He looked at the pictures, which were of the tsunami and the floating homes.  He looked puzzled.  What’s wrong I asked?  It’s just amazing to see.  As he pointed to different pictures that interested him.  I told him to click videos.  He sat back disappointed because none of them could play.  I forgot, YouTube is block in my district.  I told him to go to www.bbc.com.  He watched the incoming waves of the tsunami

I explained to him what is a three-story building; that was the size of the wave being shown in the news footage. At first he thought it was a beach wave.  I explained how many feet there are in a story so he could create a visual to go with the video.  He told me that he could not believe a wave could be that tall.  He watched a few more. Then asked more questions about the living conditions of the people.  I explained what I knew of the emergency procedures and the support system that the world is trying to provide.   

We talked about the fact that we live in Los Angeles and every home should have an emergency plan.  He thought that was a good thing.  He took some time and read more of the articles (he is considered a non-reader in his classroom).  I could tell he had true empathy for Japan.  All of Japan.  The island, the people, the conditions, the future, you could tell this meant something to him.   He asked me, do you look at this site at lot, referring to www.bbc.com.  Yea, I like it, the news is pretty good.  We got a knock on the door; it was time for him to go.  Thanks Mr. McBride, that was good as he departed.

Later that evening I watched the evening coverage on the tragic unfolding in front of me. I thought to myself, why would you not want to know.  Now, the coverage exceeds all news items at this moment, even the Middle East’s potential civil wars, our own war in Afghanistan and the dismal financial state of affairs. Suddenly, the news broke its coverage, and showed lines of cars with people in them at the TV’s station parking lot giving money for the relief efforts with the support of the Red Cross.

Therefore, I ask the question again. Does the Media have an ethical or social responsibility to not bombard us with the decimation of Japan?  

My answer is no, they do have the responsibility in my opinion to provide us with the best coverage possible about the changing condition for better or worst. Why.  So, it can stay on our minds just a bit.  Other wise, it just becomes new of the day.  This is so much more than the day’s news flash.  This is true devastation and at this point it has no end in sight.  Not to mention, the potential destruction if the nuclear reactors explode.  Something that I don’t want to see, and now I am of the age where I can turn way from that visual should it occur.   

Yes, they must show it, and in a way, we should endure it.  We are taking about human beings whom have influenced our country and the world.  We share so much.  Therefore, we should share this.  We can’t turn away now. Do you have to watch it every minute of the day or everyday? Of cause not.  Should young children witness this, no!  Should older kids see this? Only if an adult is in the room to help them make sense of this catastrophe and they should set a limit on how long they should watch.   We as a collective global community should know what is going on.  If the members in your house hold sadly said, “is this all that’s on TV.” Then maybe its time to turn off the TV and talk about it.  Talk about your emergency plan. What would you do after seeing this?

Related articles

• FULL COVERAGE of Japan tsunami, earthquake (thegazette.com)
• Social Media Crisis Infographics - Disaster Relief on Facebook Charts Japanese Tsunami Responses (TrendHunter.com) (trendhunter.com)

Design, Behavior, and a Cup of Joe

(Reprint from 10/29/2010)

When thinking about how design effects behavior, one is prone to view technology, consumer products, web-based artifacts, digital and or social media as the proverbial objects, however, I being to wonder about what was really important and what artifacts have the greatest influences on my behavior.  I came to the conclusion that it was not technology or other gadgets, but the simple things that I encounter on a day-to-day bases.  The one object that seemed to meet all the stimuli was not a gadget but an environment, which I frequent for a small cup of coffee, espresso an a occasional cup of Earl Gray. I am not speaking of any particular place because I visit different coffee shops based on my mood and or the tasks at hand. 

These cultural artifacts which have been around for centuries, today provide me with ambiance and a hot cup of coffee, while for others they offer an array of specialty drinks and sometimes pastries or a sandwich.  To a novice, there is very little difference between one environment and another, however as you frequent these social habits you will observe how the overall design has a direct effect on one’s behavior and the incubation of a coffee culture within these habitat.

In order to reap the benefits of the culture you have to learn how to navigate the space.  Although the merchandise is limited in scope and the physical space is sometimes restricted, this has no impact on the community’s desire to participate and multiply.   Therefore, brand is important for quality, consistency and reputation.  Some cultures pride themselves on offering CRS Free Trade, Think Local First, USDA Organic, Fair Trade USA, Certified Organic, and SVK Kosher to their communities as a means of being environmentally friendly. Health conscious individuals require specific product combinations' that allow them the perception of uniqueness.  This adds to how one’s behavior is modifying when interacting within the environment and the overall feeling of "making a contribution" to the world community. 

The experts of these communities are known as Batista.  They are able to negotiate the tools and merge another community’s culture and etiquette with their own, thereby supporting the perception of acceptation and ease of manipulation into their community’s of practice.  The Barista’s knowledge of the coffee culture transcends all the countries on the globe, for example Jerusalem, Spain, or Italy just to name a few. Most users know that a frappe is not always a frappe, ask any Batista.  

The technologies in these habitats are completely transparent and there is an expectation that connectivity is simplistic, intuitive, and functioning.  The interface allows all forms of technology to interact without any glitches thereby allowing the user a multitude of potential experiences. This transparency in many was is one of the main attractions for participation into this coffee culture.

Although members of these communities prefer to spend time in these social habitats, the product is completely portable.  

The visceral design is often unnoticed but its feel is inviting and captivating.  When negotiating the space, one learns that the lighting patterns offer different sub-habitats within a single space.  The overhead lighting allows for text reading, document evaluation and web based functions; while dimmer areas allows for more intimate conversation and social interaction. The secondary artifacts (i.e. furniture, chairs, stools) are movable thereby allowing the users to determine how they would like to mediate the space for engagement and collaborate.

The interior space is usually made up of warm hues and natural colors that are inviting, relaxing and at the same time invigorating, thereby time is no longer paramount.  Many of the tables are round or small rectangles that provide a cozy and personal workspace in oppose to a standard rectangle work area that occupies a traditional office. Many habitats provide comfortable seating areas that consist of over sized chairs and or inviting sofas. Some coffee shops are also referred to  as cafes'; they even resemble someones personal living space thereby providing a nice homely feeling. 

When you have acquired mastery of the tools you are able to participate with confidence.   The artifacts used to hold the products add to the stimulation of the biological functions of the brain.  The artistic design accompanying the product is satisfying to the eye and the heat that radiates into the pores of ones hands becomes comforting, as the aroma is as familiar as an old friend thereby, heightening the multi-sensory experience.

Once one has become an active participant and learned how to mediate the space, its usability becomes familiar and fully functional. You immediately know what area in the environment meets your needs and purpose.

When a user submits to this social artifact's aura of warm hues, controlled lighting and pleasant scent; often time reflective thought occurs that makes one trust the environment as a home away from home. You take a deep breath and begin to focus on your purpose.