Grungen som jag minns den

De var som gudinnor, de fulländade poslinshyade toppmodelllerna i slutet av 80-talet. Såg man ut som Claudia Schiffer skulle man bli lycklig – ett ouppnåeligt löfte och kvar fanns bara fulhet. Lika tillrättalagd hade musiken varit länge – glättigt, polerat, dansant. Som tur är orkar ingen försöka vara fulländat perfekt i mer än några år i taget och så kom grunge. Det var en befrielse att ha samma kläder på sig som dagen innan, lika bekväma som de som de sköna snubbarna som spelade musiken hade. Grungen innebar skön musik, mycket fest och sena morgnar. Men girlsen blev inte så mycket lyckligare för det som jag minns det. För även om det krävdes mindre tid för att göra sig i ordning på morgonen var tjejer fortfarande mest accessoarer som prydde - alltid i bakgrunden, utan eget värde annat än att vara snygga. Och Pamela Anderson och Carmen Electra upprätthöll fanan med nya lika ouppnåeliga ideal som passade de sunkiga öldrickande snubbarna bättre än de tidigare fläckfria amasonerna och Spice Girls passade på att paketera Girl Power med lite skojsigt fnitter.

Madchen Amick och Sherilyn Fenn var tidiga förebilder. I Twin Peaks stod inte könsmakten i fokus utan kvinnorna hade minst lika viktiga roller i det lilla samhället med det stora mysteriet som männen. Om det låter konstigt att dessa nämns i samband med grunge så är förklaringen att de var bland de första tjejer utöver toppmodellerna som fick ta rollen som snygga kvinnor på många år. Snygga i andra kvinnors ögon pratar jag om. De som försökte uppnå idealen.

Linda Perry, Alanis Morrisette och Björk sjöng sina egna fantastiska låtar, men tog därmed rollen som sexuellt helt ointressanta.

De nya modeikonerna var först Winona Ryder och sedemera Kate Moss. (Blev de modeikoner för att de hängde med Johnny Depp eller hängde med dem för att de var modeikoner... jag minns inte.) Sköra, i behov av någon som skyddade dem, men utan att bry sig om någonting i hela världen tjatade de aldrig på någon om att ta sig ett jobb eller att klippa sig. Sådant brydde de sig inte om, de var bara förälskade, storögda och öppna för det mesta. De var återkomsten av 30-talets Bonnie and Clyde.

Gwen Stefani och Drew Barrymore var det lite mer drag i ändå, de gjorde lite mer som de ville på riktigt, var inte förälskade och var snygga i sina rutiga skjortor. Ja egentligen var det väl bara Gwen som man kunde vilja vara som när jag tänker efter... och det är ganska mycket så det är att vara tonåring. Man tittar på andra runt omkring och försöker uppnå det som verkar vara ett lyckat framgångskoncept.

Nu är det dags igen för lite skotskrutigt lager på lagermode. Men hur fina kläderna hos modehusen än är kan de inte ge den dramatiska och åtråvärda romantik som grungens om än så kommersiella arvtagare Kristen och Robert eller Katy Perry och Russel Brand återskapar. Till själva modebilden av grungen hör liksom en skön snubbe med en skör brud som tar hand om eller som blir omhändertagen. De missförstådda som är hänvisade till varandra, som grälar och bråkar och älskar varandra i nöd och lust. Det är motsägelsefullt att klä sig i tillrättalagd grunge... men det kommer vi göra i höst. Rätt praktiskt att röra sig i när man är med barnen...

Givenchy höst 2013

Haider Ackermann höst 2013

Christopher Kane höst 2013

Mer om Katy Perry bl a: Role Models or only seeking confirmation
Female Role Models are needed

Girls' Games II - 2010

In 2010 7-10 years old boys play football and/or hockey. Girls too, 'it’s so good with team sports'. Then girls also do the gymnastics, ride horses and dance. No boys do that. Obviously it’s not considered important for the future.

Girls’ and boys’ outfits are more clearly separated both in colors and styles than back in the 80s, and the toys provided are still different according to current gender. Girls play with Littlest Pets and boys with Star Wars dolls, sorry figures, and Pokemon collectibles. Barbies are often passé already by 7. The ‘throw ball on the wall’ game has completely vanished. There were of course little commercialism in that, and no status gained.



But even though girls and boys seldom mix, the love games appear in the same age as before, around 7 or 8, and offer opportunities to spend some time together. Otherwise it’s only in computer games that I see girls and boys unite.

Today the computer experience starts a lot earlier though. Seven years ago we played on Disney.com with our one year old daughter. Today our youngest boy’s first words in the morning are ‘I want to play the veggies’ (veggie samurai for iPad).

My girls and their girl friends join at someone’s place playing Indiana Jones or Wii , and iPet. The family favourite is Little Big Planet. The girls spend most of their gaming time customizing their sackboy while dad is running the game forward.


The girls also play online. I’d say none of their male friends would ever join in the favourites girlsgogames or Stardoll, but otherwise it’s both online and by the consoles that they and their class mates find a common interest that today is gender neutral. The girls sit in the phone with Eliot and Linn while playing Panfu. They suddenly spend a couple of hours at the boy next door – playing Star Wars – a game they would not choose themselves, but that is fun enough and the console itself is not a problem.

Somewhat we’re back to the start of the games. I’d say many children don’t see the games, computers and consoles as male gendered. They don’t see them as techniques or machines, but as media for entertainment. They are not afraid to handle a joystick, even though I admit that the girls still want to watch for a while before trying a game, while the boys just jump into the game giving it what it takes.

Why this has changed lately? Both computers and consoles have become a standard in our life style? Lots of dads (and some moms) keep buying new consoles and want their kids to play too? Computers are both tools, entertainment and communication today?

I know I generalize a lot. Also there are more local preferences today as the supply is much wider than 30 years ago (at least in Sweden who has shifted from a social state to a capitalistic model), but I have also run communication with millions of girls word wide for the last 5 years, why I believe there is some truth in these generalizations.

There are some stronger separations in real life toys and spare time occupations than 30 years ago though and there are yet not many games that are built for girls by girls, or even for boys and girls, by girls. And why don’t women play as much in the middle of their lives and returning stronger than men later on. And what do the girls find so great about the sackboy? To be continued…

Previous post
Girls' Games I - 1980-1984

Female Role Models needed

I need women showing me their achievements. They inspire me. They show me how much courage, effort and patience I need. They tell me what I can expect so that I don't get disappointed but is armoured and prepared for the struggle I need to put up, but also that it is worth it.

The current image of who is born to do what is slowly changing in all different part of the world and women and ethnic minorities are gaining more and more equal value to the white and to the man. Many people don't know this - how big the small difference still are, but they effect me and my life every day.

Women have put their marks in the history writing, and sometimes they should have, but someone else was rewarded in their place, or they were ignored as unimportant in a male context.

Please, let me know any woman you feel has her rightful place in history, or any woman you think is missing!

You are never alone
How did Lady Lovelace talk?
Be the Cook for the Best Product
Barbie is fake, Pink is not
Alice ännu mer i underlandet
A good start of 100 most important women through times, by Shelby Ellery

You are never alone

I got a little perplex yesterday, reading a striking post on our role model Lady Lovelace. Although it is my mantra and foundation in all I do, it’s still the strangest feeling everytime you realize how true it is that you are never alone. I’m stuffed with studies on why girls often/normally don’t take interest in techniques, and yet this post again put the finger on my own personal history up til today.

The author Audrey Watters describes how she in the late seventies got her first inspiration from Princess Leia, was more into geek things but yet ended up as the girl ‘who minored in Women’s Studies but took the “easy” science and math classes for graduation because somewhere along the way I’d got the message that science and technology weren’t really my thing.’

I did all that. My second daughter is not named Leia for no reason. The impression of the original has never vanished. I’ve always been all brains in school although my friends never expected it and got just as surprised by the exams every year. I hid it well, and did my best not to stand out as a swot. I wanted to be the cool, soft type hanging outside the school gates (even though I didn’t smoke, smoking was too stupid for me) and did well on that role. Also I wanted to become a photo model, it was the times of Paulina Poriskova, Claudia Schiffer and Emma Wiklund – or winning the Nobel Prize – kind of split idea of who I was, typical to most young girls today I guess…

Of course I followed friends and other normal people for the standard studies of economy. Tech school never even came close to my mind. The image of me amongst hundreds of geek guys was just not realistic (today geek has quite a better status even amongst girls then it had before the Internet era). Yet the interest for computers and programming was persistent and after years of studies in the more female populated classes of communication, media, pedagogy and hr, I ended up in the right spot of the by the time so called ‘Multimedia’. Creative presentations on CD-ROM lead me further to social medias as MUD’s and MOO’s, lead me further to programming chat bots.

Probably due to my split goals and feeling of not going in the fully right direction being steered by powers above my own head, I early developed the deepest interest for genus studies and realized how much work there is still to do on the boys vs girls thing in all fields. The origin for me working with MOO’s was a friend and partner who considered himself not to be neither a girl or a boy, but a sex not defined, but in the virtual existence he could be what is felt he was. When programming chat bots the genus aspect arised again in the dialogue between a real life person and a fictive man or woman.

When I finally got the offer to inherit 200 dress up dolls (a genius idea by the founder Liisa) and expand them to a complete ‘game’ for young girls, there was no risk. There were no such great places for girls at the Internet 5 years ago. There was an empty hole to just fill. When offering young girls what they are interested in within the computer we are one step closer to allowing them to further develop the possibilities. Today girls know that they are on the right spot, doing the right thing when they sit by the computer. It’s a small but good start.