During the Oscars on Sunday night, a video montage featured a number of famous actors speaking about the power of movies. Gabourey Sidibe, a break-out star who was nominated in 2010 for the Academy Award for Best Actress for her role in “Precious,” shared something quite personal:

The way I watch movies, I’m really searching for myself, because I don’t get to see enough of myself and I don’t — I kind of don’t get to like myself enough.

But if I get to see myself on screen, then I know that I exist.

In that short statement, Sidibe (left, at the Academy Awards in 2010) revealed a great deal about representation and identity in Hollywood, which rarely includes women who don’t match a young, thin and white ideal. When young (and old) women don’t see themselves in popular culture — the lingua franca of our times — they receive the message that their lives are not as important or worthy of inclusion.

A number of organizations have been working to counter this message by focusing on girls’ inner beauty, smarts and talent. New Moon Girls Media, which publishes New Moon magazine and runs a moderated online community for girls, has launched Yes, I’m Beautiful!, a YouTube project that asks, “Why are you beautiful? What is true beauty? What would you say to someone who isn’t sure about her/his beauty?”

No matter what your age you can send your “Yes, I’m Beautiful” video to: beautynewmoon AT gmail.com. It’s a nice counterpoint to stories about young girls turning to YouTube to ask for public comment on whether they’re ugly.

Hardy Girls, Healthy Women is offering a free webinar in March and April to introduce its girl-driven media activism site, Powered By Girl (PBG), and will offer tips on using social media for youth activism.

As Rachel pointed out yesterday, the National Eating Disorders Association has launched Proud2BMe, which includes the Stamp Out Bodysnarking project to reduce bullying based on one’s appearance.

Later today, Lady Gaga and her mother, Cynthia Germanotta, will officially launch the Born This Way Foundation at a celebrity-filled event at Harvard University. The foundation will support programs and initiatives that empower youth — focusing on issues of self-confidence, well-being, anti-bullying, mentoring and career development.

Hollywood embraces diversity at a glacial pace. Fortunately these groups are ahead of the times.

This week is National Eating Disorders Awareness Week, designed to bring attention to the seriousness of eating disorders, to raise awareness about biological and environmental triggers, and to fight the attitudes and expectations that contribute to these disorders.

This year’s theme is “Everybody Knows Somebody.” From the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA):

This year the National Eating Disorders Association is stressing that we all need to be educated about the contributing factors, signs and symptoms of eating disorders in order to ensure early detection and intervention. We live in a culture saturated with unrealistic body-image messages and almost all of us know somebody struggling with an eating disorder. Because this is true, we urge you to do just one thing during NEDAwareness Week to 1) raise awareness that eating disorders are serious illnesses, not lifestyle choices; 2) provide accurate information to medical, educational and/or business communities, and 3) direct people to information and resources about eating disorders.

I think in part because eating disorders are often associated with girls, negative stereotypes lead people to think that eating disorders are just another bad thing girls are choosing to do, letting larger social forces off the hook for their contributions, and glossing over the need for real treatment. As NEDA explains:

Eating disorders are complex conditions that arise from a combination of long-standing behavioral, emotional, psychological, interpersonal, biological and social factors. As our natural body size and shape is largely determined by genetics, fighting our natural size and shape can lead to unhealthy dieting practices, poor body image and decreased self-esteem. While eating disorders may begin with preoccupations with food and weight, they are about much more than food. Recent research has shown that genetic factors create vulnerabilities that place individuals at risk for acting on cultural pressures and messages and triggering behaviors such as dieting or obsessive exercise.

Events are being held in various cities to educate the public and promote solutions. The NEDA website also has extensive information and resources on eating disorders. NEDA’s latest project is Proud2Bme, a website geared toward teens that features great content on developing a positive body image and healthy relationships. Check it out!

Earlier this month, The Boston Globe published a story that deserves special mention before resuming our holiday break.

The story starts by comparing identical twins, two boys who grew up with distinctly different personalities and interests. As Bella English writes:

Jonas was all boy. He loved Spiderman, action figures, pirates, and swords.

Wyatt favored pink tutus and beads. At 4, he insisted on a Barbie birthday cake and had a thing for mermaids. On Halloween, Jonas was Buzz Lightyear. Wyatt wanted to be a princess; his mother compromised on a prince costume.

You see where this is going. What makes it a must-share read is the family’s forthrightness in discussing the difficult decisions they made to ensure Wyatt, now 14 and named Nicole, is able to grow up in a world in which she feels loved, safe and welcomed.

Having read so many superficial or gee-whiz stories on transgender children and adults, this one will be remembered for its honesty and emotion, especially coming from Nicole’s father, Wayne, 53. Here’s just one example:

Last winter, Maine state representative Kenneth Fredette, a Republican from Penobscot County, sponsored a bill that would have repealed protections for transgender people in public restrooms, instead allowing schools and businesses to adopt their own policies. The bill was a response to the Maines’ 2009 lawsuit against the Orono School District.

Last spring Wayne and Nicole roamed the halls of the State House, button-holing legislators and testifying against the bill. “I’d be in more danger if I went into the boys bathroom,’’ Nicole told the lawmakers, who ultimately rejected the bill.

“She knows how to work a room,’’ her father says proudly. “She even convinced a cosponsor to vote the other way.’’

In October, the family was honored for its activism in helping defeat the transgender bathroom bill. The Maineses received the Roger Baldwin Award, named for a founder of the American Civil Liberties Union, from the Maine chapter of the ACLU.

Surrounded by Kelly and the kids, Wayne told the audience that he and his wife have had top-notch guides as they confronted the unknown.

“As a conventional dad, hunter, and former Republican, it took me longer to understand that I never had two sons,’’ he told them. “My children taught me who Nicole is and who she needed to be.’’

Go read the whole thing. And also see “What If Your Child Says, I’m In The Wrong Body?” — an NPR interview with endocrinologist Norman Spack, co-founder of the Children’s Hospital Gender Management Services Clinic at Boston’s Children’s Hospital. Spack has worked with 30 transgender youth (including Nicole) and their families on the emotional and medical issues, particularly in adolescence.

Plus: In related news this year, the Massachusetts Legislature passed and the governor signed into law the Transgender Equal Rights Bill, extending civil rights and hate crimes protections to transgender residents of that state. At left is a photo of Gunner Scott, executive director of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition, an advocate of the bill, and Craig Norberg-Bohm, coordinator for the Men’s Initiative for Jane Doe.

Both men contributed to the new edition of “Our Bodies, Ourselves“; Scott’s piece, an adaptation of his remarks at the Jane Doe organization’s White Ribbon Day rally in 2010, explains how violence against transgender people is related to violence against women.

Finally, we’re looking forward to hearing more in 2012 about the forthcoming book “Trans Bodies, Trans Selves,” a resource guide for the transgender population, covering health and legal issues, along with cultural and social questions, history and theory. Check out the list of contributors and topics.

by Kat Friedrich

There is a striking lack of mainstream news coverage of the health hazards posed by beauty products, such as hair relaxers and skin lighteners, that are commonly used by black women. African-American women spend more on beauty products than white women do, but far too little research has looked at how women use these products.

So when the New York City-based WE ACT for Environmental Justice set out to survey African, African-American, and Latina women this year to find out how they use beauty products and what they know about them, it was an important step toward increasing awareness of a long-standing women’s health issue.

“We noticed that groups conducting surveys around this have focused on middle-class white women,” Ogonnaya Dotson-Newman, campaign director for WE ACT in Harlem, told The Uptowner. “But there is a whole area of hair products that you wouldn’t know about unless you live in certain urban areas.”

Straight hair has often — and unfairly — been an occupational requirement for black women. TV journalism is one of the most problematic fields (see the Maynard Institute’s historical view of “good hair” on the TV news). Reporter Rochelle Ritchie’s 2010 story (right) about going natural with her hair — and doing so publicly — made headlines and is included in the Body Image chapter in the new “Our Bodies, Ourselves.”

Keonte Coleman, an assistant journalism professor at Bennett College, has more on Ritchie’s backstory and decision to cut her hair on TV, and the standards to which black women in professional media positions are often held.

“Maybe there aren’t any guidelines preventing natural hairstyles, but there is a culture in place that fosters the need for black women to look like their white counterparts,” writes Coleman.

The ingredients of hair relaxers, which many black women use to straighten their curls, are anything but relaxing. Almost all of the samples of currently available hair relaxers tested by Environmental Working Group (EWG) were ranked highly toxic, although limited information was available. Allergic reactions, hormone disruption, immune system toxicity and organ toxicity were four of the main risks.

In contrast, hair straighteners, which are more commonly used by white women, have generally been considered to be relatively safer. EWG’s website shows most of these products are medium-risk with the highest concerns being allergic reactions, immune toxicity and hormone disruption. These risks are similar to those of the hair polishers which are used by women of color.

That was the thinking, at least, until 2010, when concern about formaldehyde in Brazilian keratin hair straighteners made headlines after salon workers in Oregon and internationally complained of breathing problems and eye irritation. Formaldehyde is an industrial chemical that can cause a host of health problems, including an increased risk of cancer.

In response, the FDA this year sent a warning letter to the makers of the hair straightening product Brazilian Blowout, which was found to contain formaldehyde even though it was labeled “formaldehyde free.” (The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics provides a timeline and status update since complaints were first lodged.)

It’s interesting that the formaldehyde in Brazilian Blowout drew criticism from the FDA, while the many ingredients in hair relaxers African-American women use have remained under the radar. These relaxers, as well as costly hair extensions, have been on the market for a long time.

Yumna Mohamed, reporting for The Uptowner, summarized some of the research on black women’s hair products:

While hair dyes, bleaches and relaxers have already been linked to skin problems (including rashes, burns, itching and hair loss), a number of national studies are being conducted to determine whether women of color face higher risks of breast and lung cancer from beauty product exposure.

Dr. Mary Beth Terry, a Columbia University epidemiologist, published a study in May in the Journal of Immigration and Minority Health showing that African-American and African-Caribbean women were more likely to be exposed to hormonally-active chemicals in hair products than white women, and used them more often.

“These products are often used daily and over the course of many years,” Terry says. “A number of these commonly-used products contain endocrine disruptors and placenta, and exposure to these could cause women to be more susceptible to hormone-sensitive diseases such as aggressive breast cancer.”

WE ACT expects to release its survey findings in January. It will use the information to lobby the cosmetics industry and advise women about the dangers in hair products.

Kat Friedrich is an environmental journalist whose work focuses on urban communities. She lives in Boston, uses Twitter, and blogs at Science Is Everyone’s Story.

A Doctor of Psychology candidate at Deakin University in Australia who is working on her thesis about the connection between a woman’s body image and her sense of well-being contacted us with a request to share a link to the online questionnaire where women 18 and older can participate in her research.

The questionnaire will ask you about how you feel about your body, behaviors related to your body, and how you feel about yourself in general. You can complete it online and they estimate that it should take no more than 20-30 minutes to complete.

The survey includes some questions about sexual orientation, height, and weight, as well as your satisfaction with specific parts and areas of your body and how much you think you resemble your “ideal” body. The researchers do mention that “The completion of this study may result in increased self-awareness regarding your attitudes and feelings about your body, yourself, and your life. For some individuals, this self-awareness may produce…discomfort.” Information about how your responses will be kept private is also provided on the website.

As mentioned in yesterday’s post on the new book “What You Really Really Want,” this past weekend’s New York Times Magazine carried an amazing article  – Teaching Good Sex — that uses a Philadelphia private school’s approach to sex ed to illustrate a simple but controversial question: What if we actually taught young people about pleasure, orgasms, healthy relationships, and the wide variety of what is normal in both sexual desire and physical appearance?

I want to highlight one specific issue raised in the article — the lack of awareness among high school students about what women’s genitalia look like. While there has been little fanfare about the elective class so far, its instructor, Al Vernacchio, a well-liked and respected sex scholar who also teaches English at the school, notes that some lessons do draw more attention than others:

The lessons that tend to raise eyebrows outside the school, according to Vernacchio, are a medical research video he shows of a woman ejaculating — students are allowed to excuse themselves if they prefer not to watch — and a couple of dozen up-close photographs of vulvas and penises. The photos, Vernacchio said, are intended to show his charges the broad range of what’s out there. “It’s really a process of desensitizing them to what real genitals look like so they’ll be less freaked out by their own and, one day, their partner’s,” he said. What’s interesting, he added, is that both the boys and girls receive the photographs of the penises rather placidly but often insist that the vulvas don’t look “normal.” “They have no point of reference for what a normal, healthy vulva looks like, even their own,” Vernacchio said.

One female student remarked that when the class covered a biology unit, she was surprised she knew quite a bit about the opposite sex: “I probably would’ve been able to label just as many of the boys’ body parts as the girls’, which is sad. I mean, you should know about the names of your own body.”

Compounding the problem of a lack of education is that many students are relying on the most readily accessible photos of women’s naked bodies — media-distorted images and online pornography — and these images don’t exactly promote a realistic view.

I recall that my own sex education experiences involved uniform line drawings of healthy genitals and graphic photos of STI-affected genitals, but nothing visual, and especially not photographs, to indicate that there really is a wide range of what healthy genitalia look like. At Our Bodies Ourselves, we have a long history of encouraging people to grab a mirror and take a look at their own genitals, advice that shows up from the earliest to the most recent editions. Another good resource about women’s genitals is this article over at Scarleteen, which talks realistically about normal variation in size, shape, and color.

Meanwhile, there’s a petition at SignOn.org calling for better tracking of cosmetic genital surgery. The petition also wants surgeons who offer these services to “provide full information on genital diversity” when working with women who have concerns about the appearance of their genitals. “Without this information, women cannot make an informed choice,” the petition reads. It continues:

Most surgeons’ websites are loaded with photographs that misinform the public about female genital diversity. The “before” photos in the before-and-after online photo galleries depict a range of genitals as abnormal, but scientific studies show that many different shapes, sizes, and colors are normal. The photo galleries not only misinform, but they increase women’s and girls’ self-consciousness and add to anxiety. Photos may even be photoshopped or retouched.

This is a topic Heather Corinna also covers in the Scarleteen article, explaining that while some women do have physical discomfort or other medical reasons for wanting genital surgery, “for the most part, for nearly all women, your labia ARE normal, however much they vary. Beauty — as ever — remains in the eye of the beholder.”

That’s a lesson all students could benefit from.

The Skin Deep Cosmetics Database, a free online database maintained by the Environmental Working Group, provides information on the safety and potential harms of ingredients in make-up, sunscreen, facial cleansers and moisturizers, contact lens solutions, shampoo, nail polish and remover, baby wipes, soaps, and creams, toothpaste, fragrances, and other cosmetic and skin care products.

You can browse by cosmetic category or search for the name of your favorite product to find out about possible hazards in terms of cancer risk, reproductive toxicities, and allergies. Information is also provided on companies’ animal testing policies. The directions and ingredients listed on each product label is listed, and links are provided to other similar product types and products from the same manufacturer. You can also read others comments and leave your own on specific product pages.

Because in some cases there may not be much testing data on particular ingredients, the amount of available data is labeled, such as none, limited, fair, or robust. Information is provided on whether the data come from a single or multiple animal studies (which may be of limited value for humans), or if there is strong evidence of potential harm in humans.

Sources of data used for the assessments and the methods for computing scores are provided at http://www.ewg.org/skindeep/site/about.php. Thus, you can see how the assessments and ratings are derived in a pretty transparent way. For the fellow librarian readers, yes, I sent them a suggestion about the Hazardous Substance Data Bank!

I love the idea of a database like this, because it’s often difficult to know how “safe” any particular product is. I personally don’t have the appropriate background in toxicology to assess how accurately the potential risks of common ingredients are described, so I’d love to hear from readers with that expertise. I’ll also leave it to commenters to talk about why it was necessary for the “men’s” products to be in their own segregated section of the site.

I don’t really even want to talk about “Bridalplasty,” the new show in which women compete to win the “ultimate” wedding – complete with plastic surgery – because it’s too easy to ridicule the participating women without examining the larger issues that make anybody think this whole show and its foundational ideas about women and weddings are a good idea. It would take more than a blog post to deconstruct all of the problems here. Instead, I’m going to leave it to Modern Lady’s Erin Gibson (successor to Sarah Haskins), who concludes that everything about the show needs its own makeover:

If you can tolerate more, see the New York Times, Change.org, and Fornicating Feminists.

by Nekose Wills | OBOS program assistant

The challenges girls face today are unlike the challenges many of us faced growing up. I’m 32, and I remember not caring about my Oscar the Grouch eyebrows, who designed my clothes, or how sexy I looked in them. Girls growing up today don’t have such freedom — they’re sexualized everywhere they look.

The SPARK Summit, held Oct. 21 at Hunter College in New York City, was an alarm, waking us up to the role we can play in bucking the status quo and giving us the tools to take on this fight. SPARK stands for Sexualization Protest: Action, Resistance, Knowledge.

The day started with opening remarks from Hunter College President Jennifer Raaband and MTV’s Amber Madison, summit host and author of “Hooking Up: A Girl’s All-Out Guide to Sex And Sexuality,” a book aimed at young women about sexual health, sexuality and relationships.

Feminist media critic Jean Kilbourne, creator of the groundbreaking “Killing Us Softly: Advertising’s Image of Women” film series, also spoke, followed by a keynote address from the actor Geena Davis. Perhaps best known for her role in the film “Thelma and Louise, ” Davis has long advocated for increasing and diversifying the presence of female characters in media aimed at children. Her presence was a welcomed reminder that not everyone in Hollywood accepts business as usual.

The SPARK Summit encouraged young women to find their voices. There were a number of workshops specifically geared toward self-expression, such as Street Theater, FlipCam Journalism, and Blogs Rock. Throughout the day, it was clear that girls are very cognizant about being sold images of who they should be, but they lack resources to actively combat those images.

Media literacy is the first step. Melissa Campbell who works on media literacy in San Francisco and founded the Manfattan Project (“real fashion, large bodies”), led the Hard-Core Media Literacy workshop. In other workshops, girls created radio spots, photography and art, and shared personal stories. They discussed topics such as street harassment and legislation that would fund media literacy and youth empowerment programs (H.R. 4925).

My favorite part of the day was the Numbers Don’t Lie panel, during which researchers presented findings on how media images and messages influence girls. Among them:

• Even in video games where women are strong, central characters, their sexualized appearance negates the effect of the character’s power — “Video Game Vixens: The Sexualization of Women and Girls in Video Games,” Elizabeth Behm-Morawitz (University of Missouri-Columbia)

• Black women are the most sexualized group in music videos. — “Sexualization in Popular Female Artists’ Music Videos: An Analysis of Race and Genre,” Jennifer Stevens Aubrey (University of Missouri-Columbia)

• Black youth consume more media than their white peers, but they are less affected by the body image ideals perpetuated — “A Woman’s Worth: How Media Use Shapes Black and White Teens’ Views of the Feminine Ideal,” L. Monique Ward (University of Michigan)

• When the media sexualizes female athletes, it negatively affects girls’ perceptions of themselves and of female athletes — “‘You Can Score With Me’: What Girls Think of Sexed-Up Media Images of Female Athletes,” Elizabeth Daniels (University of Oregon)

• Low grades can spur girls to participate more in their own sexualization — “High Heels, Low Grades? The Costs Associated With Sexualization,” Rebecca Bigler & Sarah McKenney (University of Texas, Austin)

• The attire of women and girls in G-rated movies is no different than portrayals in higher-rated movies — “General Audience or G-Porn? A Look at the Prevalence and Sexualization of Females in Film and Children’s Television programming,” Stacy Smith (University of Southern California)

I also learned that Barbie is still evil. One study — “‘I can be … Anything?’: Playing with Barbie Reduces Girls’ Career Aspirations,” by Aurora Sherman and Eileen Zurbriggen (Oregon State University and University of California, Santa Cruz) — found that playing with Barbie lessened girls’ perceptions of attainable occupations. It didn’t matter if girls played with Doctor Barbie — they still thought they could not achieve as much as when they played with Mrs. Potato Head.

The panel made me realize the extent to which girls are encouraged to see themselves as sexual objects — even girls as young as 3 can still be the toddler in a tiara.

We are told that if we just buy enough products, go on enough diets, and work hard to emulate airbrushed and Photoshopped images of girls and women, we might achieve perfection — and there’s something inherently wrong with us if we don’t dedicate ourselves to this quest. It’s time to take our sexy back.

There is nothing wrong with sexy as long as it is not forced on girls and as long as women get to define it on their own terms, not through the lens of a voyeuristic, paternalistic society.

My favorite quotes from the conference were “I am whole, not a ho!” “I am a quirky black girl and proud of it!” and, finally, “Freedom is never really won, you have to earn it in every generation.” We are trying to earn freedom for the well-being of today’s girls.

Years ago, I learned to disconnect from the constant onslaught of negative media images by consuming less. When I stopped watching music videos, especially the ones on BET, and stopped buying women’s magazines, I was much happier. There were less false images for me to compare myself with.

Those images were replaced by the women I saw on the train and on the street, who were in my life as three-dimensional people, with non-airbrushed photos and presences, with blemishes on their faces and extra fat rolls on their sides; real women, beautiful as the reality of an honest life.

The SPARK Summit was the reminder I needed that we can be who we are, with no apologies. We can replace the constant drumbeat of fake “perfection” with action, resistance and knowledge. And, most importantly, we need to have this dialogue on a continuing basis.

From the moment we put girls in front of a television, turn on the radio, drive past a billboard, or let them look at a magazine, we need to reinforce what it means to be beautiful, media literate, and critical of the world around us. I have a few young ladies I need to call.

by Culley Schultz | SPARK blog tour

As a teenage girl, I watch television on a regular basis. “Glee” happens to be a favorite of mine. Unlike most shows on television, “Glee” showcases students of every race, religion and size. There are multiple representations, but more importantly, there is accurate representation.

The majority of shows now depict glamorous lifestyles enjoyed only by the rich and skinny. Shows like “America’s Next Top Model” are not only using unrealistically thin women, they are forcing women to compete to be the most beautiful.

The media’s obsession with thinness is having a serious effect on girls and young women. Narrow definitions of the “perfect woman” put a box around women, and it is closing in on our ability to be ourselves.

Studies show that “cultural pressures that glorify ‘thinness’ and place value on obtaining the ‘perfect body’” [pdf] play a major role in causing eating disorders. Over half of teenage girls use unhealthy weight control methods such as skipping meals or taking laxatives.

Most children begin watching television shows at a young age. By age 10, 81 percent of girls [pdf] are afraid of becoming fat. It is because of the portrayal of teens on shows such as “Gossip Girl,” which attracted more than 2 million viewers during the 2009 fall season, that girls believe they must be thin to be “hot” or to have relationships. This message needs to be reversed.

It is not only young girls who are affected by the media’s messaging; 45 percent of U.S. women are on a diet any given day. The sexualization of women on television reaches millions of viewers every day. There is a significant difference in the messaging between the representation of women in the Victoria’s Secret commercials, where only thin models strut in their panties with angel wings on, and the Playtex bra commercials, which showcase women of varying sizes.

The truth is most fashion models are thinner than 98 percent of American women, but we rarely see ourselves on TV or in movies. The lack of accurate representations of women in the media has created the belief that we’re not good enough unless we look like those models or actresses.

It is time to change that mindset. The media is playing to what they think we “like” to see. It is up to us to change their ideas. I know I would like to see more girls that look like me. On Monday nights, I choose the self-esteem boosting characters of “Glee” over the inaccurate portrayals of teens on “Gossip Girl.” If we have more of these options, a real change will commence. Women have the power to demand this change. And from that change, we will all benefit.

Culley Schultz is a senior at Glen Ridge High School in New Jersey where she is vice-president of the Glen Ridge chapter of Girls Learn International. Culley previously interviewed teen girls on their views of media representations of girls and women. Watch the video at the Women’s Media Center.

Look for another post from the SPARK blog tour tomorrow at Feministe.

SPARK — which stands for Sexualization Protest: Action, Resistance, Knowledge — is both a summit and a movement designed to push back against the increasingly sexualized images of girlhood in the media.

The SPARK Summit, scheduled for Oct. 22 at Hunter College in New York City (and virtually online), is focused on working with girl leaders and activists to jump start an intergenerational movement for girls’ rights to healthy sexuality. The idea is to engage teen girls and young women to be part of the solution rather than to protect them from the problem by providing them with information and tools to become activists, organizers, researchers, policy influencers and media makers.

Readers are invited to participate in a study being conducted by researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s Eating Disorders Research Program. Participants will complete an online survey about body image and weight concerns in adult women 50 years old and and over.

From the researchers:

In contrast to extensive knowledge about body image and weight concerns in young women, we know very little about how body image and weight concerns change as women mature. We would like to develop a deep understanding of how women age 50 and above feel and think about their bodies, both in terms of appearance and function.

If you are a woman age 50 or older, we invite you to follow the link below to answer 45 questions to help us understand the concerns that women have with their body, their appearance, and their health. We feel that this is an important topic that is central to the health and well-being of a growing and influential segment of the American population and hope to use the responses to inform service development for women over 50.

Your participation in this research study can take from 10-30 minutes depending on how many open-ended questions you would like to address. We very much appreciate your time and your help in addressing this important topic.

The survey is available at https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/392VSFY, which also provides information on the privacy of participants and the study’s contact personnel and institutional review board approval.

Back in 2007, we reported on the release of a devastating report from the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls. Its findings about the impact of sexualized images on young women weren’t necessarily revelatory for long-time activists, but the thoroughness and precision with which it outlined the cultural crisis provided a renewed foundation of evidence and authority.

Inspired by the report, a coalition of organizations — Hardy Girls Healthy Women, TrueChild, Women’s Media Center, Hunter College and the Ms. Foundation for Women — is convening the SPARK Summit: Challenging the Sexualization of Girls and Women, on Oct. 22 at Hunter College in New York City.

The event will include “girls and media professionals, thought leaders and funders, researchers and activists” and “serve as a national call to action and campaign for change.”

You can follow the build-up to the summit on Facebook and on Twitter (@SPARKsummit). You can even help decide on the meaning of the SPARK acronym by voting on the Hardy Girls blog.

A recent collection of essays out of Australia, “Getting Real: Challenging the Sexualisation of Girls,” edited by Melinda Tankard Reist, also strikes a tone of urgency in its insistence that the problem is only increasing and activism must rise to meet it.

Noni Hazlehurst writes in the preface:

The insistent and ubiquitious presentation of this unbalanced view of the world is nothing less than a form of child abuse. Why is it we kick up such a fuss about junk food and obesity, but are unwilling or unable to tackle the lack of quality sustenance for child’s minds and spirits? [...]

In my view our children’s imaginations are dying. Their sense of themselves as worthy, strong individuals who are valued because they are unique is constantly being undermined. Only a few can withstand that sort of pressure. And very few will be in a position to be encouraged to be different, as many of today’s young parents don’t remember when there were alternative ways of looking at the world and other ways to value an individual’s noteworthiness.

Media critic Jean Kilbourne, among others, provides a rousing endorsement of “Getting Real” — and Kilbourne has just updated her landmark film series, “Killing Us Softly,” on the same subject. “Killing Us Softly 4″ can be previewed and purchased at Media Education Foundation. From the film’s description:

The film marshals a range of new print and television advertisements to lay bare a stunning pattern of damaging gender stereotypes — images and messages that too often reinforce unrealistic, and unhealthy, perceptions of beauty, perfection, and sexuality. By bringing Kilbourne’s groundbreaking analysis up to date, Killing Us Softly 4 stands to challenge a new generation of students to take advertising seriously, and to think critically about popular culture and its relationship to sexism, eating disorders, and gender violence.

Kilbourne also continually updates her definitive list of “Resources for Change” — which provides an exhaustive, clearly categorized set of links to useful reports, websites and allied organizations.

Despite the availability of all these resources and the continual, varied calls to action, however, many young women on the frontlines of this cultural crisis remain conflicted and confused, caught in an impersonal media machine. Possibly the most prominent example of this struggle is, yes, Miley Cyrus.

In his review of her latest album, “Can’t Be Tamed,” Jon Caramanica of The New York Times discusses the difficulty 17-year-old Cyrus has coming of age as a woman and an artist, negotiating her well-established Disney “Hannah Montana” identity and her need to assert her adulthood.

In her now infamous 2008 Vanity Fair photo shoot (remember the outcry — and response to the outcry?), and in the literally wild video for the title track of her new album, the seemingly inevitable sexualization of her image is well underway.

But Caramanica sees a much more hesitant and haphazard construction of identity. Instead of solidifying a new sexualized Miley, the album as a whole reveals the “frayed seams of her identity”:

Ms. Cyrus’s metamorphosis isn’t nearly as radical as “Can’t Be Tamed” — the title track, the video, the title — would suggest. Rather, she’s evolving into something far less controversial: a pop star, confused like all the rest of them.

This confusion is most clearly evident in one of the later songs:

On “Permanent December,” written with Claude Kelly — who also helped write “Party in the U.S.A.” — Ms. Cyrus tries out a sneering type of sing-rapping, à la Fergie: “Don’t call me a Lolita/’Cause I don’t let ’em through.”

On a more coherent album, that idea would be explored further. But the fact that Ms. Cyrus feels little need to assert her sexuality, or lack thereof, is consistent with her rejection of a single new identity in favor of a cluster of experiments. Perhaps she hasn’t had time to think it through, or maybe she’s realized that evading the subject for now is a more flexible strategy than tackling it head-on.

Of course, presuming that Miley’s original Disney identity didn’t involve its own form of sexualization would be naive. And I’m not just talking about the crazy Mickey Mouse underwear ads that debuted in China a couple of years ago, or the “dive in” underwear for girls that Disney wrote off as an “oversight.”

Last month, according to the Orange County Register (more here), the YWCA of Australia sought “a PG rating for tween magazines Disney Girl, Barbie Magazine and Total Girl, saying that the publications teach young girls that their bodies need to be improved upon.”

UPDATE: The New York Times reports that young fans of Miley Cyrus aren’t super thrilled with her new path. Also, see the comments for great information about the Healthy Media for Youth Act, H.R. 4925. The Girl Scouts is a strong supporter.

The current issue of the journal “Clinical Risk” has of a series of articles commenting on risk and cosmetic surgery, from reputation and regulatory risks to physicians to clinical outcome risks for patients.

Because the journal is based in the UK, much of the discussion of the regulatory environment is focused there, but the articles also address the trend of cosmetic surgery tourism between nations and general perceptions of and risks to patients seeking cosmetic surgery.

In the editorial for the issue, plastic surgeon Nigel Mercer writes that “We have reached a stage where public expectation, driven by media hype and, dare one say, professional greed, has brought us to a ‘perfect storm’ in the cosmetic surgical market.”

He also describes a “massive increase in ‘marketing’, including discount vouchers, 2-for-1 offers and holidays with surgery! In no other area of medicine is there such an unregulated mess. What is worse is that national governments would not allow it to happen in other areas of medicine. Imagine a ‘2-for-1’ advert for general surgery?”

Another author, Khoo, notes the “grey area between advice and advertising” when surgeons provide information to prospective customers (patients). Similarly, Bradbury writes that cosmetic surgeons should be prepared to decline to do procedures, to say “no” or “not now,” and should avoid pushing extra procedures on a client.

The idea that cosmetic surgery carries minimal risk is also criticized. Mercer writes that “the media and both published and broadcast ‘marketing’ have wittingly or unwittingly given the public the impression that cosmetic surgery procedures are quick fixes and carry no risk of downtime or complications. Nothing could be further from the truth and it defies common sense to think otherwise.”

The BBC has additional coverage of the issue. On a related note, The Guardian published a story last Friday on labiaplasty and the increase in the number of these procedures in the UK in recent years.

PsychCentral.com has launched a new body image blog called Weightless. From the site description:

Weightless is about well-being, not weight; about fostering body image, regardless of your size. It’s about exposing women’s magazines, other mediums and so-called experts, when they’re touting unhealthy tips and promoting restrictive standards.

The goal of Weightless is to help women develop a better body image and work toward accepting themselves as they are, while being healthy and happy (fad diets and skinny-mini standards prohibited!); and to become sharp consumers, who can pick apart a commercial or magazine article and know which advice is helpful or harmful.

In one of the site’s first posts, writer Margarita Tartakovsky identifies seven signs you may be suffering from a poor body image and suggestions to help readers be less self-critical. In the aptly titled “Minding Women’s Magazines: Asinine Advice,” Tartakovsky pulls out “tips” from magazines including Women’s Health, Self and Cosmopolitan and deconstructs the messages. To wit:

3. “Your fear: ‘I overeat at parties.’ Celebratory spreads make it easy to stuff yourself. But obsessing over every bit will ruin your night. ‘Ask yourself, How do I want to feel tomorrow? Bloated and disappointed or proud and healthy?’ Beck says. Strap your watch on the wrong wrist as a visual reminder of your goal; you’ll automatically eat less.” {Self, November 2009, pg. 87}

As I was reading the first few phrases, I found myself nodding in agreement — especially the part where we shouldn’t be obsessing about food — up until the value judgments rolled in. So what if I do enjoy one too many appetizers at a holiday party, instead of saying to myself how delicious the food was and acknowledging that I did overeat and will try to avoid that next time, I should feel like a bloated, disappointed failure. Thanks Self!

Since women are often made to feel like they’re overeating anytime they’re enjoying their food, I wish the response first questioned why we think we’ve crossed the line. For some, overeating at a party might mean consuming more than one tiny appetizer.

But though it sidesteps this question, I appreciate that a popular and respected website on mental health considers body image a topic worthy of its own blog. And I’m glad  Weightless launched in time to confront  the holiday weight smack-down.

Plus: Last month, Randy Cohen, who writes The Ethicist column for The New York Times, asked whether ads using electronically altered images of models — making them ridiculously skinny — should  be banned or come with a warning label. The model pictured here was digitally altered for a Ralph Lauren window display in Sydney, Australia.

Speaking of Australia, a federal government advisory group comprised of educators, psychologists and media folks have put together a national strategy on body image (pdf).

One of the group’s members, Danielle Miller, writes about the recommendations, including the proposed educational curriculum and voluntary code of conduct for advertisers and fashion companies. In this frank discussion, Miller acknowledges the shortcomings of the proposal and the difficulties that lie ahead.

Picture this: You walk up to a magazine rack at your favorite bookstore and you’re confronted with numerous self-improvement suggestions: “10 Easy Ways to Lose Weight” … “Exercises to Get a Bikini Body” … “Fashion Tips to Look More Like [Someone Else] … OK, you’ve been here before. You know exactly what this looks like.

Now imagine that instead of walking away frustrated, you reach into your Super Activist Bag and pull out a new, empowering cover — it rereads: “BEAUTIFUL just the way you are.”

You slip it in front of one of the make-over-you magazines and walk away, satisfied for having spread a new message.

This newly launched “art action” is more than a good story. It’s the brainchild of Massachusetts artist Lillian Hsu, who created the website www.bjtwya.com to protest the objectification of girls and women — and to do something about it.

Hsu encourages placing one of the BJTWYA posters “over every stack of magazines that uses the female body to sell something — to sell the magazine, or to sell an article, or to sell a product, or to sell a lifestyle, or to sell a promise, or to sell the idea that you need to match your body to the picture. You decide which covers qualify. You place a poster over them. Then you walk away. That’s it.”

All you need to participate is a supply of posters, which you can get by emailing “bjtwya AT yahoo DOT com” with your name, mailing address, contact information, and number of posters needed. The posters are printed on 8.5×11″ paper, heavy enough to stand up on a magazine rack.

If you have a color printer or can’t wait for delivery, print your own copies of the poster (PDF).

Either way, be sure to visit bjtwya.com to learn more about how Hsu came up with the art action. You’ll also find links to organizations and activists that address media and body image issues. And if you’re anywhere near Gloucester, Mass., an exhibition related to Beautiful Just The Way You Are is at the Jane Deering Gallery through Aug. 3. The opening reception is this Thursday, July 9, 6-8 p.m.

Here’s an excerpt from Hsu’s smartly worded and compelling statement:

The magazine rack is only one of many locations where we are taught the lessons of our culture, but it is one that is ubiquitous throughout our towns and cities and reaches every stratum of the population. At the magazine rack words and pictures work together seamlessly, like a good children’s book, to teach and tell a story of who we are. The covers shout their messages with surprising confidence that we will know these commands are for us. Before we are ten, and then without pause throughout our lives, we internalize the lesson that our bodies are how we will be first judged as individuals, and that there is a body type that we must attain to be judged worthy of attention. We learn that the female body can be used to sell anything — tangible or intangible — to women, men, and children. The use of a motorcycle, a deodorant, a vacation, a necktie, or a beverage implies ownership of the woman’s body pasted into the advertisement. Although all humans are born with beauty and power, our early unquestioned self is quickly corrupted. We adopt an anxiety in navigating a path towards a culturally dictated state of beauty and power.

BEAUTIFUL Just The Way You Are seeks to intervene in the space between all who stand before the magazine rack and the engine of advertising and mass culture. In that space of daily life it places an alternative.