American Girl's "New" Homeless Doll

As a patron of Pleasant Company (now known as American Girl and owned by Mattel, Inc.) since the tender age of somewhere around five or six, one could certainly say I grew up with the American Girl dolls. My parents allowed me to choose one doll, and it was given to me the Christmas after I turned seven years old. To this day, I still own, cherish, and collect items to go with my vintage Molly MacIntire doll, the glasses-wearing World War II era girl, because I chose her with the knowledge of what she'd "been" through. Her story interested me the most--growing up while her father was away at war with a crop of siblings and a busy mother--but before I chose this doll, I read every other American Girl's story first. There was Felicity, the colonial-era doll struggling with her own family's Patriot beliefs while her best friend was a Loyalist. There was Addy, an escaped slave (who escaped in the first book of her series). There was Kirsten, a young Swedish immigrant whose closest friend died on the boat to America, and there was Samantha, a Victorian-era mischievous girl whose closest friend was a 9-year-old factory worker during the industrial revolution.

Nowadays, Samantha has been impermanently retired and there are many more dolls, including a 1970's era girl, a Native American, and Kit, a girl who grew up during the Great Depression. American Girl has recently started putting out limited-edition dolls, modern-day American Girls, each year. Girl of the Year 2009, Chrissa, recently dealt with her family's move to a new town and bullies at her new school. Gwen, the doll this year, is homeless after her father's leaving and her mother's loss of a job (seems like it will be because of the recession).

First of all, good for you, American Girl! I know that the number of homeless children in the United States has risen dramatically increased since the recession began, and I also know that these children will need something to relate to. At the same time, critics are complaining that perhaps, this doll will glorify homelessness.
My first response: what the hell, critics. I mean, seriously. When I read Kit, the Great Depression doll’s, story, I remember her fear of becoming homeless when she had to start working, at the tender age of nine, after her father lost his job. He lied to the family that they had money left over and she found him waiting in a bread line to bring them food. In Samantha’s story, her friend describes watching a young girl getting scalped by one of the machines in her factory, while in Kirsten’s the nine-year-old watches her friend buried after watching her die of cholera. These books are serious and touch on issues that children need to learn but may not ever learn in the comfort of grade school classrooms. At the end of each book is a five or so page spread, nonfiction, about the topics discussed in the books. I used to refer to those last few pages of the books for schoolwork up until mid high school. Each doll has a series of five books and I read every one of them at a very young age. My friends, male and female, and I discussed them and we learned a lot about history, and were able to relate to it.

Nowadays, however, I find myself talking to the grade school youngsters about one of the best parts of my past and learning that they have no idea what I’m talking about. “I have five of the dolls!” one youngster tells me. Another discusses her plans to get others as gifts. If they have read the books, they’ve only read the first book in a doll’s series, and only because a copy of the book comes with the doll. Some girls haven’t even read that.

So I guess, to one of these young “collectors” (these dolls cost $95 apiece, by the way…way to teach kids the value of a dollar) a homeless doll would glorify homelessness. I mean, if somebody had given me a Molly doll in 1997 without having me read her story, I would’ve been happy-go-lucky to dress her in the cute clothes. I never would have learned about the bombings in London and how they made other children homeless.

I guess that’s another thing—Gwen’s story isn’t the first to discuss homelessness. In fact, she isn’t the first homeless doll. Kirsten was homeless when she first came to the United States, and her family doesn’t get their own home until the last book of the series (she stays with family after the first book). Addy was homeless after she escaped slavery for a few books. Kit nearly loses her home and Molly ‘s family takes in a young British refugee after she loses her home during World War II.

Hey critics…you don’t know what you’re critiquing.

As for complaining parents, how about you stop buying your kids dolls for a moment and bring them to the library. There, you can teach them about history for free, and the American Girl books are a great resource.

Source: TIME Report

I am (not) a Rebel: Part II of Whoami

A lot of students go to college because they don't know what else to do and because they aren't yet able to survive in the real world. At least, that's what they tell themselves.

You see, I truly respect colleges and universities for what they are supposed to be--institutions that give students great learning opportunities. The problem is, that isn't their first priority anymore. When was the last time you went to a college town? What do you see there every (in particular Friday and Saturday) night?

Reminded of: Scott Westerfeld. This list-topping science fiction author wrote the dystopic Uglies series, set a few hundred years in the future where age is the determining factor in what social class you are a part of. Children live with parents, pubescent (starting at 10, I think) children, or uglies, live in dorms, and at age 16 you get an operation to make you beautiful and just like everyone else. You then go to live in new pretty town, a place where everyone is a late teenager-early 20s-ager and parties all the time. The pretties don't have a care in the world because, during their surgeries, they have been made virtually indestructible and they can't get sick. STD's are extinct. Something the pretties don't know, however, is that their surgeons gave them brain lesions while they were being perfected. They are programmed to have fun and not to think.

So why the hell do college students today, particularly undergrads, choose to act this way? I think a lot of you already know how insane it drives me when my peers drink their weekends away, perpetuating the stereotype that all college undergrads are drunks who can't control themselves around liquor. Actually, I take that back. Change liquor to Keystone Light. Hah.

So I choose not to get drunk. I have no problem with drinking. Having a few drinks with friends is fine, but why do college students seem not to have a stopping point? Don't they realize that it won't solve any problems to down sixteen light beers and whatever else gets thrown at them? Do they really enjoy hanging out in scuzzy bars filled with sounds and smells that assault every physical and emotional sense? Don't they know that their boss could call them on a Saturday night with some work emergency (even if it's only a weekday job)? Do they ever consider that professor who could at some point be an incredible resource and mentor might be walking down the street and the same time they are veering down it, hardly able to speak? Do they really think they're solving anything by drinking? Why not spend an empty Saturday night fixing whatever you're worried about rather than stewing over it?

On top of this, my peers are setting our generation up to be looked at as a generation of drinking, debauchery, and general lack of discipline. When I stayed at my parents' house visiting after my first semester, my mother joked that now that I was a college student, I still couldn't drink the wine she'd left open in the cabinet. The joke assumed that, being a college student, I couldn't control my societal instincts to grab a bottle of whatever alcohol was available and down it. I know it wa a joke, but it didn't strike me as funny. Where there's smoke there's fire. If people can joke about a stereotype, there are people who believe it. When I explain that I've just finished my freshman year of college, I hate the wink and the "how was it?" I hate even more the surprise these people show when the first thing I describe are my classes, my job, my extracurricular activities, and the incredible people I met and worked with.

So I guess that makes me lacking in awesome rebellious young adult stuff. I won't ever be the 27-year-old who, when asked how his weekend was, answers "Awesome! I just stayed drunk the whole time!" Um...okay. I didn't gain a freshman fifteen, and I obviously never will. I've never smoked pot or any illegal drug, and I won't. I think it's stupid and it doesn't appeal to me. I will continue to make decisions based on financial feasibility and long-term goals rather than short-term satisfaction. I will wear a bike helmet despite being a good biker (yes, after my period of teenager-hood where I decided that I didn't need one, I've decided that I'm far too intelligent to get my head smashed by something I can't control). I will work a job that I enjoy and make it a part of my life, rather than sprinting out the door at 5pm every day.

Why is this such a big deal, though? It's almost like I'm a rebel to choose doing these things. Teenagers and young adults are expected to be rebellious, and that rebelling is drinking, smoking, apathy, and more, but this is really just following the crowd. I'm a rebel in my own right and I already stand out for that reason, but I stand out in a good way.

Something that bothers me about this is the way people tell me I am so "mature" for acting the way I do. My recent financial and education decisions have led many adults I know to praise me, to be proud of me, but my peers don't understand. I've been compared to an investment gone bad and told that I shouldn't talk about some of the things I talk about because I should be embarrassed. I disagree, but not before wondering if maybe I should just go along with the flow a little more. I know that, in the future, I'm going to have to deal with my peers as coworkers and perhaps I should network with them socially a bit more. But if that requires drinking excessive amounts of disgusting and doing things that are regrettable, I guess I'll just have to network with the few who are unrebels like me. I am (not) a rebel. And I like it that way.

First and Foremost, I am Nothing But a Tax Deduction: Part I of Whoami

At least, that's what I feel like today. When your family decides to build a new house over the course of tax year 2008 and then can't decide whether to let you file as independent or dependent, that means you have to do your taxes in July 2009 (once all the paperwork goes through three months after you've filed for an extension, of course). Gotta love bureaucracy.

It was finally decided that this year it would be easiest to have me file as a dependent, because there are no reasons why I shouldn't. Pretty much, my parents get more money back for claiming me than I would for claiming myself. Sadly, this way, I actually owe the government of Illinois money (geez, I guess I was some sort of workaholic 18-year-old?). Anyways, it got me thinking.

I mean, I don't mind being claimed; otherwise I would have filed independently in February and my parents would have had nothing to say about it. At the same time, it makes me feel inferior, but I'm not sure why. I know a few parents who give their children nicknames like "Daddy's Little Tax Deduction" and stuff, and it's cute for a while, but I guess there's a point where it isn't cute and it's just annoying. (For instance, naming your child after the month they were born in. How cute on a baby, how annoying when I get asked in a professional setting "So were you born in April? REALLY? ". As if you've never met someone named after something. Give me a break. Can we get back to the interview now that you've set it aside in your little mind-book that I have a silly name?)

Anyways, I think I'd punch somebody in the face if they called me a tax deduction right about now. I mean, really. I've had it with trying to figure out if I'm a child or an adult in the eyes of the government. I pay all my own bills, rent, college, food, etc...but yes, I am still being claimed as a dependent. I can vote, but I can't buy alcohol. And I can live entirely on my own, but I still can't use my salary instead of my parents' on the FAFSA (unless I get married, of course. Because I would suddenly be a real person if I got married at nineteen).

And yes, I do know that a lot of my friends are still claimed by their parents, but I'm curious. I've noticed that I'm the only person I've talked to who fills out my own tax forms but is being claimed as a dependent. I truly don't mind; in the end we're getting more money back from the government. Still, I'd like to know how many of you out there close to my age are claimed, aren't claimed, fill out your own tax forms, don't fill out your own tax forms...

I'm really interested. I know that my financial situation is currently a lot simpler than my peers'. A lot of you have money saved up for you in accounts that have existed since before you were born or soon after, and your parents understand the situation better than you do so they just do the taxes. In that case, are you still claimed as a dependent? Are your parents or aren't your parents helping with college, and does that affect how you file?

The truth is, I may or may not have my own dependents someday. Even if I'll never have children, I still like to think of how I would raise them, were I raising them in this exact moment. I guess I always had this idea that the year they were 18 for most of it, I'd stop claiming them and teach them to do their own taxes (yes, the 18-year-olds in my situation do have more money than just college loans and whatever they made this past year; there's no way I'd ever make a kid without having some form of support for it already stashed away). I think that would be a strong step toward financial independence. If you know me personally, you know how I feel about students these days never learning to become financially independent.

On that subject, I actually wanted to share a frikking amazing idea that seems really obvious now, that Scott Swanson gave to me in a twitter conversation about undergraduate college students and money.

His idea is that a substantial way to help your undergraduate college student become financially independent is to help them financially, but to have them track everything they spend of both their money and yours. His suggestion is Quicken Online, which is free and actually gives you little charts of where all your money goes, category-wise. I have used it for about a year now and LOVE it.

I have met far too many college students who just don't understand the value of a dollar. In my opinion, a good way to teach a college student the value of a dollar is to get them to track every cent that goes towards them from an early age and to have them do their taxes. Also, make them write the checks that pay for their education, their rent, etc. This way, your student isn't at a disadvantage because he or she is going into debt, attempting to fill out dozens of scholarship forms a week, working 30+ hours a week, and et cetera while he or she should be studying. Your student is also not at a disadvantage because he or she has no idea how much that, say, $12,000 a year *is* when he or she is finally out in the real world.

Because no, college isn't the real world. More on that in my next article. ;-) For now, comment on this one. Thoughts anybody?

Whoami?

If only figuring out who we are was as easy as this Linux command. Of course, it's only to know who you are logged in as, so assuming humans aren't turing machines, we don't have a whoami command. (Ok, this is a stretch, but I've had a fever all day, so give me a break, ok?) :-D

For those of you who aren't that familiar with what I'm talking about, just understand that I am nineteen years old, and I have decided that is a pretty good time to set in stone who I am. I mean, I guess I already thought I knew, but my society tells me otherwise.

Over the course of the next few days/weeks, I am going to write five articles. Here are the layouts. This is subject to change. If you want me to look at anything else, let me know and I will do what I can to write about it!

1. First and foremost, I am nothing but a tax deduction.

This article is about money. Well, in particular, it is about how money makes me feel and how money makes other people feel, and how I want money to make the people I care about feel.

2. I am (not) a rebel.

This article is about age. It asks once again the question my closest friend in second grade asked me back then: "Is it that we are more mature than the other kids? Or that they are more mature than we are?"

3. I am a white raised lower/middle class upwardly mobile middle class young woman raised protestant now atheist higher-than-average intelligence techie linguist sociologist digital native partly-ginger low-income for a regular person but not for a university student and (your) blogger.

This article is about social class--in particular, my social class and experiences with it--and role models. I pose the question: Is Michelle Obama a good role model for every woman?

4. I am beautiful.

This article is about physical beauty. I've been told so many times in my life that I am "ugly", and then all of a sudden, I got "pretty". I want to look at that.

5. I am female adult Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

I have adult ADHD. When I was younger, I had undiagnosed ADHD. I want to explain some of the misunderstandings that come with ADHD, especially for women and adults, and I want to explain why I think ADHD defines me and makes me such an amazing person.

Bill of Rights for Digital Natives

Hey all--I thought of this during the weekend before NECC, and started writing it. It's been kind of worked through a lot, so I hope you find it informative!

**Bill of Rights for Digital Natives**


1) The right to a Facebook (access).

A digital native should, at the age of 13, have the right to use any social networking site based off of his or her PERSONAL DECISION. At the age of 13 based on international law, a person comes of age on the internet. Not 18, not 21, not 24, but 13. That is when a person is considered old enough to understand privacy policies and agree to terms of use. Therefore, a person age 13 should be allowed to make the decision about whether he or she wants a Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr, or so on. This is not a parent's decision. A parent should guide his or her digital native, but should also understand that a student starting a good digital footprint at a young age is necessary in today's cutthroat world of school, job, and social opportunities.

Side note: NO ONE should EVER be required to give his or her passwords to someone else. This includes children and parents. Not only is this secure, it teaches students good habits for the future. If a parent wants to see what his or her son or daughter is doing online, said parent should get a Facebook and friend the student, and then it is the student's decision whether or not to let the parent in. I was once asked, as a computer science major, by two parents to help them "hack" their digital native's MySpace account. Do you really think that hacking someone's social networks is going to make them respect you and the (actually important) advice you have to give them later?


2) The right to an education (aka digital footprint knowledge).

I am one of the luckiest high school students in the United States. When I started at the Illinois Math and Science Academy (IMSA), I was required to attend a session teaching me about my digital footprint and what I should or should not do with access to the internet. Safety, law, and accountability were straightforwardly discussed. In exchange for this class every student at IMSA was given virtually (I say this because some ports were blocked due to security risks) unfiltered access to the internet. More about that later. All in all, it is the right of every digital native to have this discussion, preferably at the age of thirteen or before.


3) The right to non-filtered, uncensored world access.

This begins with the networks students are given. Don't block pictures that could be considered crude; every digital native has seen worse, no matter how strongly you censor what they see. I mean, you didn't teach your daughter any of those words you heard her using with her friends but she learned them, right? I dare you to ask your 12-year-old if he's watched Neda die. Especially if you don't know what I'm talking about, you are no longer allowed to judge what your digital native does and doesn't do online. 


4) The right to privacy/encryption and safety.

There should be laws dictating what to do and what not to do to on the internet, and those laws should be clearly spelled out. I am not a lawyer and I will not try to be, but I do know that digital natives should be educated on what their legal rights are and where those rights end. I see far too many people getting in trouble for things such as torrenting that they never knew were illegal. If you know and choose to do it is one decision; doing it without realizing it's wrong because you never had the opportunity to learn is another. Imagine a cop ticketing you for speeding in a district that chose never to post speed limits.


5) The right to curiosity.

Under no circumstances should any digital native, or any person of any generation, be told what he or she can or cannot learn.

So, that's my Bill of Rights for Digital Natives! Comment, add, discuss, please!