Traveling with my daughters used to be easy. They would gamely explore anything, as long as there was the promise of ice cream at the end. But when Anjelica, 12, and Natalia, 15, each hit middle school, they rebelled. All they wanted to see in a new city was ... the mall. Overnight, I became an earnest guidebook-toting frump. During a recent trek to Phoenix and Scottsdale, though, I decided to spiff up my image and walk a mile in my daughters' Hollister Co. flip-flops. I proposed a girlie itinerary that included pampering at one of the area's legendary spas, browsing for vintage bargains, and (legally) checking out downtown Scottsdale's burgeoning nightlife scene. And just so the girls wouldn't think I'd completely turned over a new parenting leaf, I also snuck in a culturally enlightening museum visit. A car is the best way to get around town, but luckily my two are still too young to drive.

The Commodification of Childhood: The Children's Clothing Industry and the Rise of the Child Consumer. By Daniel Thomas Cook (Durham: Duke University Press, 2004. x plus 211 pp.).

Daniel Cook's thought-provoking examination of the children's clothing industry in the United States sheds new light on the development of children's consumer culture in the twentieth century. Focusing on the years between 1917, when the children's wear industry launched its first trade journal, and the end of the baby boom in the early 1960s, Cook demonstrates how children's wear became increasingly age segmented as merchants and manufacturers began designing goods and retail spaces with children's needs and desires in mind. Cook identifies the 1930s as the major turning point when merchants, manufacturers, and advertisers of children's wear recognized children rather than mothers as their primary consumer target. This shift, Cook argues, marked the emergence of a new marketing perspective--what Cook provocatively terms "pediocularity"--that viewed "the world through children's eyes" instead of a mother's eyes (p. 6).

Cook provides an informative account of how children's wear merchandising became increasingly segmented and child focused. Before World War I merchandising of children's wear was rather limited. Only one factory specialized in children's clothes before 1890, and mass merchandisers often stocked children's clothing with adultclothing in various departments throughout the store. Clothing, in other words, was organized by type rather than age. As publisher of the trade journal Infants' Department, George Earnshaw played a pivotal role in pressing retailers to devote floor space and specially trained salesclerks to children's departments. This strategy first gained traction in infants' departments, which courted the loyalty of mothers by hosting talks about infant care and staging baby contests during the U.S. Children's Bureau's "Baby Week" campaigns. By the late 1920s, department stores and chains like Sears and Montgomery Ward began including children's departments that catered to school-age boys and girls. Most strikingly, in the 1930s children's clothing departments were divided and subdivided into a range of gender and age groupings.

Cook highlights a variety of factors that made manufacturers more attentive to the child's point of view in the 1930s. Faced with shrinking markets in the Depression, merchants and manufacturers likely saw greater age segmentation as an opportunity to expand demand. By recognizing that children possessed personal desires and stressing the importance of personality development, childrearing advice also helped legitimize the practice of giving children a greater say in their own clothing. In translating such advice, women's magazines encouraged parents to consider children's preferences and concerns about fitting in with their peers when selecting clothing. They also suggested that allowing children to choose their clothing helped children learn good taste. Children's popular culture also advanced child-focused merchandising. Child stars like Jane Withers, Judy Garland, and Mickey Rooney all either had their own clothing lines or endorsed children's wear. Cook in particular credits Shirley Temple, whose own stage dresses and retail line of clothing had a toddler "look," for helping to make the toddler-size style range for girls a viable new merchandising category.

Cook's most interesting and original chapters (the final two) detail the strategies merchants used to "appeal to the child as the decisive consumer" (p. 97). Retailers decorated stores in bold primary colors, lowered counters and mirrors to convenient child heights, and placed clothing within easy grasp. Some even put swings in their store and awarded boys subscriptions to American Boy when they made a purchase of $10 or more. Well-trained salesclerks treated children as equals and avoided any hint of condescension. Sensitive to teenagers' yearnings for autonomy, youthful salesclerks even sided with teens over their mothers. As industry segmentation accelerated in the 1940s and 1950s, retailers became savvier in appealing to preteen and teenage girls. Stores "institutionalized and appropriated the clique structure of white, middle-class teen girl peer society" by recruiting popular high school girls to serve on fashion boards and to model merchandise in store fashion shows. Owners and buyers regarded these popular teens as "translators" of youth culture and expected that other teens would follow their fashion lead (p. 131). Retailers also learned that the success of the new teen departments and the new preteen size category hinged on their "visual, spatial, and stylistic distinctiveness from younger children's areas" (p. 133). Locating teen departments far from baby departments and next to the college shop appealed to teenage girls who studiously avoided appearing too young and often took their fashion cues from college-aged women. As Cook insightfully explains, "in the world of the high school and junior high, independence and maturity--or at least their public, bodily markers--functioned as a form of cultural capital" (p. 139).

Socioculturally constructed prescriptions for femininity and female sexuality define attractiveness and desirability of a woman as contingent upon her appearance and, especially, upon a thin body shape and low body weight (Hesse-Biber, 1996). In Western cultures, such standards for femininity are pervasively reflected and reinforced through the mass media with relentless images of idealized female physiques that have become progressively leaner over the past few decades (Botta, 1999; Groesz, Levine, & Murnen, 2002).

Given that the cultural ideal for female beauty has implications for one's attractiveness to the other sex, girls often believe that success in heterosexual dating is dependent upon their body shape. Studies have documented a strong association between girls' interest in heterosocial popularity and their concern with appearance and weight (Lieberman, Gauvin, Bukowski, & White, 2001; Simmons & Blyth, 1987). As adolescent girls mature, they become more aware of their bodies in terms of sexual attractiveness and attribute greater importance to their attractiveness than do boys. Consequently, girls experience greater concern about physical features that symbolize sexual attractiveness than do boys (Davies & Furnham, 1986).

The importance of physical appearance appears to be especially salient for early adolescents as heterosocial involvement forms. Younger adolescents appear to have different reasons for dating than do older adolescents; they give more weight to a potential dating partner's superficial features (e.g., looks, fashionable clothing) and approval by others than do older adolescents (Roscoe, Diana, & Brooks, 1987). Maccoby (1998, p. 212) wrote that "Adolescent girls are perfectly aware of the importance of physical attractiveness in the eyes of the other sex, and many become intensely preoccupied with their hairdos, their complexions, their clothes, and especially with controlling their weight."

In addition, having a boyfriend, or even pursuing a romantic interest, in middle school enhances girls' popularity with peers. Girls consider being in love to be socially desirable because it is a way to prove their popularity with boys and, accordingly, improve their popularity status among their female peers at an age when being popular is especially important to their self-esteem (Simon, Elder, & Evans, 1992). If being popular is contingent upon having a boyfriend, and having a boyfriend is contingent upon attractiveness, early adolescent girls, as they begin to interact with boys, may increase the importance of thinness and attractiveness for self-worth at a time when their bodies are growing proportionally larger as a consequence of puberty.

Previous research indicates that early dating and the inclusion of boys in the peer group are related to body image disturbance. Simmons and Blyth (1987) suggested that there is a strong relation between girls' interest in the other sex, their popularity, and their concern with weight and appearance. In a middle-school sample, girls who had started to date in the past year were found to engage in more weight management than did girls who had not yet started to date (Levine, Smolak, Moodey, & Shuman, 1994).

Similarly, Cauffman and Steinberg (1996) found that cross-sex involvement predicted higher scores on an assessment of eating-disordered behavior in a community sample of 12-13-year-old girls. One of their important findings was an interaction between dating and menarcheal status in the prediction of eating-disordered behavior, which indicates that the effect of heterosocial dating on eating disturbance is moderated by the experience of menarche (Cauffman & Steinberg, 1996).

Not all girls who date or who experience increased contact with boys, however, develop body image disturbance. The cognitions and beliefs that girls hold about themselves and dating may be an important factor in the way girls experience their bodies. Understanding not only early adolescent girls' behavior in relationships with the other sex, but also how the rules of such behavior, or scripts, are defined during early adolescence may elucidate how cross-sex relationships influence adolescent girls' concerns about weight and physical appearance.

Social scripts are socioculturally defined cognitive models, or schemas, that individuals use to organize their experiences in the social domain and to form expectations and evaluations pertaining to social interactions (Ginsburg, 1988). According to Simon and Gagnon's (1986) sexual script theory, traditional gender roles for dating are typically acquired during childhood and adolescence (Simon & Gagnon, 1986). Gender role violations have implications for interpersonal evaluations. For example, women who eat smaller meals are perceived more positively than are women who eat larger meals (Basow & Kobrynowicz, 1993). Similarly, a woman is judged as more culpable for a rape if she deviates from her gender role by initiating physical contact on a date (Muehlenhard & MacNaughton, 1988).

Toys play important roles in the lives of young children. They stimulate pretend play, the development of cognitive skills, and social play with other children. Toys are also highly gendered. Boys and girls generally have different toys, and it is important to know how those toys impact their development.

More than 30 years ago, Rheingold and Cook (1975) observed the toys and other objects present in 1- to 6-year-old boys' and girls' bedrooms. They found that boys and girls had the same number of books, musical items, stuffed animals, and the same amount of furniture. However, boys had a greater variety of toys, and they tended to have more toys overall. There were also differences in the kinds of toys that boys and girls possessed.


Boys had more vehicles (e.g., toy cars and trucks, and also larger items such as wagons). There were 375 vehicles in the boys' rooms and 17 in the girls.' Not one girl had a wagon, bus, boat, kiddie car, motorcycle, snowmobile, or trailer in her room. Boys had more "spatial-temporal" toys (e.g., shape-sorting toys, clocks, magnets, outer-space toys); they also had more sports equipment (e.g., balls, skates, kites), toy animals, garages or depots, machines, military toys, and educational and art materials (despite the fact that these may be seen as gender-neutral).

Girls' rooms contained more dolls, doll houses, and domestic items (e.g., sinks, dishes, stoves). Boys almost never had domestic toys. Although dolls were more common for girls, it depended on the kind of doll. Girls had six times as many female dolls and nine times as many baby dolls as boys did, but boys and girls had about the same number of male dolls. In the boys' rooms, however, "dolls" were usually in such categories as cowboys and soldiers, probably comparable to today's action figures.

Since Rheingold and Cook's study, other researchers have reported on the kinds of toys boys and girls request (e.g., in their letters to Santa Claus), or what toys are purchased for boys and girls. Such studies have consistently shown that girls request and receive more clothing and jewelry, dolls, and domestic and musical items, whereas boys request and receive more sports equipment, vehicles, military toys and guns, and more spatial and temporal items such as clocks (Almqvist, 1989; Bradbard, 1985; Bradbard & Parkman, 1984; Downs, 1983; Etaugh & Liss, 1992; Richardson & Simpson, 1982). It is interesting that children apparently ask for more stereotyped toys than the ones parents spontaneously choose, which tend more often to be educational or artistic materials suitable for either gender (Robinson & Morris, 1986; Robinson, Watson, & Morris, 1984). Nevertheless, it is clear that both parents and nonparents purchase gender-stereotyped toys for children (Fisher-Thompson, 1993; Fisher-Thompson, Sausa, & Wright, 1995), especially for boys. Some studies have also shown that salespeople steer customers in the direction of gender-typical toys for children (Kutner & Levinson, 1978; Reynolds, 1994; Ungar, 1982).

There is evidence of some change over the years in children's toy requests. A recent study of children's letters to Santa showed that girls were as likely as boys to ask for real vehicles, sports equipment, and male dolls, and boys were as likely as girls to request clothing and educational or art toys (Marcon & Freeman, 1996). However, girls continued to be more likely to ask for dolls and domestic items, and boys were more likely to ask for toy vehicles, military and outer space toys, action figures, and spatial toys.

There are also many studies in which children were specifically asked about what toys they like, as well as observational studies of the toys with which children play (e.g., Blakemore, LaRue, & Olejnik, 1979; Campbell, Shirley, Heywood, & Crook, 2000; Carter & Levy, 1988; Martin, 1989; Martin, Eisenbud, & Rose, 1995; Serbin, Poulin-Dubois, Colburne, Sen, & Eichstedt, 2001; Servin, Bohlin, & Berlin, 1999). Although there are individual differences, the fact that boys and girls prefer and play with different toys is one of the most well-established features of gender development in children's early years. In fact, some recent research has shown differences in preferences for stereotyped masculine and feminine toys, even among young nonhuman primates (Alexander & Hines, 2002).

As boys and girls play with different kinds of toys, we certainly are interested in the impact of these differences in their play experiences. To understand the implications of boys' and girls' play with toys, we need to know how boys' and girls' toys are different. Some of the differences between boys' and girls' toys are obvious, but others are subtler. Some years ago, Miller (1987) examined several characteristics of boys' and girls' toys. With the assistance of preschool teachers, Miller selected 50 toys for young children to be rated by undergraduates on 12 different dimensions (e.g., Can the toy be manipulated? Is it used for symbolic or fantasy versus reality play? Can it be used to express nurturance? Does it encourage aggression? Can it be used to construct something new?). She also had the toys rated by the undergraduates as more suited to boys or to girls.

Ihate to ask such a question of Spectator readers, but we must all move with the times. What, I ask, does a girl do if she's been dumped after a one-night stand? To whom does she turn for sound advice and shining example?

Luckily, Debrett's, the publisher of those thumping great red-and-gold hardback directories of the Peerage and Baronetage (the DNA of the British aristocracy in 3,000 pages), can help here.

Yes, Debrett's. Clearly, there is some marketing convulsion under way within the 18th-century formerly Piccadilly-based publisher. For rather than punctilious entries pertaining to Collateral Branches, Predecessors, and Courtesy Titles, Debrett's is now proffering tips on drunk dialling, bikini waxes and speed-dating.

In its new book, Debrett's Etiquette for Girls, there is also advice on how to comport yourself with dignity during office flings with married men, something called espresso sex, visits to planet celebrity, and Festival chic. It is all done with great wit and good sense, and there are fruity photographs of scantily clad young beauties on every page.

In Saudi Arabia this past March, fifteen girls died when religious zealots forced them back into a blazing school building because they weren't wearing Islamic headscarves and black robes. Scuffles broke out between firefighters and members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice.

A civil defense officer told the Arabic-language newspaper al-Eqtisadiah that he saw three of the religious police "beating young girls to prevent them from leaving the school because they were not wearing the abaya." The much-feared mutaween roam the streets wielding sticks to enforce dress codes and sex segregation and to ensure that prayers are performed on time. Those who disobey are beaten and sometimes jailed.

Ihate to ask such a question of Spectator readers, but we must all move with the times. What, I ask, does a girl do if she's been dumped after a one-night stand? To whom does she turn for sound advice and shining example?

Luckily, Debrett's, the publisher of those thumping great red-and-gold hardback directories of the Peerage and Baronetage (the DNA of the British aristocracy in 3,000 pages), can help here.

Yes, Debrett's. Clearly, there is some marketing convulsion under way within the 18th-century formerly Piccadilly-based publisher. For rather than punctilious entries pertaining to Collateral Branches, Predecessors, and Courtesy Titles, Debrett's is now proffering tips on drunk dialling, bikini waxes and speed-dating.

In its new book, Debrett's Etiquette for Girls, there is also advice on how to comport yourself with dignity during office flings with married men, something called espresso sex, visits to planet celebrity, and Festival chic. It is all done with great wit and good sense, and there are fruity photographs of scantily clad young beauties on every page.

But still. The whole endeavour is undeniably racy for such a traditional publisher. The (soft) cover shows an ample-bosomed pouter spilling out of her frock and supping an oyster, for starters.

In Saudi Arabia this past March, fifteen girls died when religious zealots forced them back into a blazing school building because they weren't wearing Islamic headscarves and black robes. Scuffles broke out between firefighters and members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice.

A civil defense officer told the Arabic-language newspaper al-Eqtisadiah that he saw three of the religious police "beating young girls to prevent them from leaving the school because they were not wearing the abaya." The much-feared mutaween roam the streets wielding sticks to enforce dress codes and sex segregation and to ensure that prayers are performed on time. Those who disobey are beaten and sometimes jailed.

1 Higher Learning

The Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls, a $40 million school primarily financed by the influential talk show queen herself, opened in South Africa last month. Its 150 students, chosen from thousands of the country's poorest households, will receive a top-notch education, clothing, and room and board--and will face the weighty expectation that they will emerge prepared to help lead Africa.

2 Truth to Power

Since 1921, the U.S. Capitol building has housed a 7.5-ton marble statue honoring American suffragists. But the tribute, which depicts three White women, including Susan B. Anthony, will soon have a sister joining the gang--abolitionist, orator and, yes, suffragist Sojourner Truth. Congress passed a bill in December to add her image to the monument.

3 The Original Queen of Soul

Renowned R&B singer Ruth Brown died at age 78 last November. She first shot to stardom in the 1950's with such rollicking hits as "(Mama) He Treats Your Daughter Mean" and later went on to win a Tony and a Grammy.

4 Hold That Thought

"What I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.'"

--CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck during an interview with African-American Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), who is the first Muslim elected to Congress

5 This Is What All the Fuss Is About?

Affirmative action was recently outlawed in Michigan, but that apparently won't change much for White college students. According to data from two Ivy League researchers, eliminating affirmative action would increase White students' chances of admission by a mere 1.5 percent.

6 Turning a "AIDS clinics are being funded by diamonds."

--Russell Simmons, who just so happens to own a jewelry company, quoted in the New York Post praising the African diamond trade. Contrary to Amnesty International's findings, he claims the industry no longer fuels human rights abuses and actually advances the continent.

7 Save the Children?

Of all the things to protect kids from, we never thought a book by Maya Angelou would be on the list. But some parents in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, want I know Why the Caged Bird Sings removed from the high school curriculum because it discusses rape and teen pregnancy.

8 On the Record

Emory University is putting information a bout slave trade voyages--buyers, genders and ages of Africans bought, prices paid and more--online for free. Scheduled for completion in 2008, the project will include records of more than 35,000 transatlantic slave voyages from 1595 to 1866.

9 Deadly Force

In November, narcotic agents with a "no knock" warrant burst to the Atlanta home of Kathryn Johnston, 88, and shot her to death.

10 Biblical Blowout

Who knew that Blair Underwood as Jesus and Samuel L. Jackson as the voice of God would be a hit? The Bible Experience, an audio Bible with a Black cast that includes Angela Bassatt and Denzel Washington, is a top seller on Wal-Mart's Web site and the most popular audio Bible ever stocked by Family Christian Stores. In its first six weeks on the market last fall, more than 70,000 units were sold.

My mom refuses to let me wear a thong under my Spandex shorts for volleyball, saying it's bad hygiene. All my friends wear them!

Even if your mom doesn't understand your agony over pantylines, maybe this medical argument will work: After some back and forth on the issue, experts now say women who wear thongs are just as healthy down there as those with full-cut granny panties. What can cause an infection? Wearing damp, too-tight clothing for too long. So tell your mom it's not the kind of undies you slip on--it's about staying dry.

I've been sunburned a few times on my face. Now I have a hard spot on my chin, and it stings a little. I'm afraid I have cancer.

Props for being in the know about the sun's damaging effects. What you describe, though, sounds like a facial wart from the human papilloma virus. HPV is common ... and contagious. If you touch a towel or person with the virus, you could wind up with a stinging, hard growth, explains Dr. Craig Eichler, a dermatologist in Naples, Fla. While it's harmless, a wart can take months or even years to go away. See a dermo for a quick, practically painless removal.

I just started to "develop" a breast bud a few months ago. But I'm wondering if it's normal that my other one hasn't come. Does this happen a lot?

Your body is behaving normally, promise. Puberty causes hormones to surge and breast tissue to grow. Sometimes, one side is more receptive to hormones, explains Dr. Mary LoFrumento, a pediatrician in Morristown, N.J. The other breast will catch up, but it could take up to a year. Meantime, wear a sports bra that squishes breasts and makes them look even. You're not alone. Most women's boobs, like their feet or ears, are slightly different in size.

When I run, I get a cramp in my bladder area. I exercise daily, so I'm in shape. What gives?

According to Diane A. Smith, a nurse in Bryn Mawr, Pa., you could have weak pelvic floor muscles supporting the bladder, causing it to knock around when you run. This can be solved with Kegel exercises. Do them by squeezing down there, like you're trying to stop your urine. Be sure to breathe and pull in your tummy, and hold for eight seconds. Do this 10 times in a row, working up to three sets a day. If this doesn't