{journal twelve}

I'm protesting Halloween this year by not dressing up.  Actually, I just forgot to get a costume.  But still. I'm tired of feeling like I have to dress like a tramp every Hallow's Eve.

It is nice not having to worry if my butt is going to be hanging out of the strips of material I called a costume last year while I'm walking down 6th Street.  Because I will admit, I have worn my fair share of barely there Halloween costumes for the sake of fitting in at Halloween parties (even though the whole time I was pulling down my skirt and pulling up my shirt).  I'm just not a show-half-your-body sort of gal.

Why is it that on Halloween, girls/women have the option to either be ugly, or slutty?

ugly: 

or slutty:

or scary slutty:

Yet men have the option to be cool looking doctors, astronauts, lumberjacks, famous athletes, you know it.  If a woman was to go to a costume party dressed up as a lumberjack, people would probably laugh at her.  Unless it was a sexy lumberjack.

Here are some costumes that are sexed up, and really, really shouldn't be:

"sexy Nemo" -- what?

"sexy Ninja Turtle"

this one was advertised as "sexy small child"...wrong on many levels

Halloween is for dressing up and having fun.  If you want to be slutty, or risque this Halloween, I say go for it.  I just don't like it that that if a woman is going to dress up and have fun for Halloween, she has to show half of her body in order to be accepted.  

I think this is telling of our society as well.  In every day life (not Halloween), women that reveal more skin, cleavage, butt are more likely to receive more attention it seems.  Think about high school, it's the cheerleaders in the short skirts that are the popular ones, but the girls in art or the girls in choir.  Throughout our society, 'less is more' when it comes to how much clothing you're wearing vs. how much attention you will be receiving.  Halloween isn't any different.

P.S. a friend of mine just posted a picture of herself in her Halloween costume.  She was an astronaut ... a sexy astronaut (see above mention of cool guy costumes).

{journal eleven}

I thought Wired Magazine was about tech stuff?  Apparently not.  

As an avid consumer/absorber of everything new media, Wired is a favorite magazine of mine.  But in recent months I've started to notice the subtle objectification of women in the pages of their magazines and on their covers.  It started with an image of a women in a slightly risque position accompanying an article that had absolutely nothing to do with women/risque positions/etc., and now we've evolved to boobies on the front cover.

I also have another beef with Wired Magazine.  There is little mention of women kicking butt and taking names in the technology world.  And HELLO, there are a lot of women doing awesome things in the tech world.  Maybe Wired isn't as forward thinking as everyone thought it was.  Maybe writers at the magazine aren't doing proper research on the current state of the industry, or maybe they think only men read the magazine (which is false, most of my tech savvy female friends subscribe).

Back to this cover.  Yes, the article being promoted is about tissue engineering.  Yes, that does affect breast implants.  But I think there could have been a more classy/less exploitive image choice made.  Women are in the tech world.  Even more so, women are achieving major technological advancements in the tech world.  It's time for magazines like Wired to take note of this and realize it isn't just a boy's game anymore.

{journal ten}

I just remembered another type of mom...
the cool mom

I had a few friends in high school who had "cool" moms.  Their moms were typically younger than the other moms, hot (I guess they were MILFs) and always wanted to be their daughters' BFF.  They were very involved in their daughters' lives, concerned about how their daughters' dressed/looked (always wanted them to look hot, but maybe not as hot as them).  They were always the mom that friends loved hanging out with.  Friends could talk to them about anything (because she wasn't "like other moms"), and they usually let their kids (and their kids' friends) do things that other moms wouldn't do (have parties, drink, etc.).

This brings up the controversial issue of parents letting their children and their friends drink "under their supervision."  Because as the classic "cool mom" line goes, "I'd rather you drink here at home with me than out at some party where you have to drive home."  While this makes friends think that mom is super cool, it may make other parents completely lose respect for that mom, or even not let their kids hang out there any more (unless they too are a cool mom, then it's all okay apparently).

It seems like these mom are trying to live vicariously through their kids (it mostly seems to be mother and daughter duos).  Maybe these are mothers that got pregnant with their child early in life, and feel like they missed out so they're trying to live through their child?  I don't know.  But sometimes it seems like these moms care more about being their daughters' best friend rather than their parent.  I'm sorry, but I don't want my mom to go on vacation with me and us wear matching string bikinis and take shots together.  I want a mom (and want to be a mom) that is respected by their children, and their children's friends.  But at the same time be a friend, and be someone that they can talk to.  I think there is a balancing act between being a parent and being about to relate to your child/being someone your child wants to be around.  And some moms totally do not understand that balance.

Are these moms bad moms?  Maybe so, maybe not.  But they are definitely seeking approval from their children and their children's friends, possibly because of their own insecurities about being a parent and not being "young and cool" any more.

{journal nine}

This post was inspired by a brief discussion we had in class recently about our gender identity being a result of biology vs. a result of society.  It was particularly interesting to me because in my Sociology of Gender class last semester we had many discussions about this very thing.  The articles referenced in this post were from the sociology readings from last semester.  If you'd like to look at them, or get more information about them, I'd be happy to bring them to class.

--------

There are two basic ideas about how we become who we are as a person. The first idea is that the ways we grow, act and think are biologically wired in us from birth. The second idea is that environmental factors, such as the way we were raised and whom we interact with, influence who we are as a person. There have been countless debates about which one is responsible for how we become who we are. Different fields of research and science credit different things for how we develop. My opinion is that that while both factors influence us, it is through the environmental factors and social contexts we experience that biological influences come into play.  Simply put, the biological factors that differentiate males and females don’t matter unless they are considered within relevant social contexts.

Looking strictly at biology, some researchers claim that it is through biological influences, and those influences only, that we develop into who we are.  Some studies suggest that it is through biology that we can explain gender, or what it means to be masculine or feminine. While taking a sociology of gender class last semester, several studies we read claimed that the masculine or feminine characteristics we have are with us from birth, and it is through prenatal exposure to certain hormones that we are particularly masculine or particularly feminine. For example, according to one of the researchers we studied in sociology (Udry), women have taken on bigger roles and gained more equality in society because of increased exposure to testosterone while in the womb (2000).

I think that while there are certain attributes that we are born with that determine our gender, it is through social forces that those attributes are developed. Biology isn't final.  For instance, our social experiences can influence our gender, and can alter what predetermined gender identities we were born with.  Someone born biological female can encounter numerous social influences that can alter her gender. Influences such as the way she was raised by her parents, the demographic make-up of where she lives or the friends she has can alter her gender. If she was raised in a household with a father who pushed her to disregard feminine activities, a disengaged mother, and no sisters, she might grow up with more of a masculine perspective.  If she was particularly interested in sports, or if the friends she has don't like to engage in feminine activities, her own interests might not be feminine. Her competitive nature that she learned through playing sports might aid her in a professional setting, in which one day she becomes the vice president of a company. Her being more masculine was because of her social experiences, not necessarily because of increased exposure to testosterone while she was in her mother’s womb.

While biology does matter, gender is viewed as a “socially constructed institutional arrangement, with gender divisions and roles built into all major social institutions such as the economy, the family, the state, culture, religion and the law, that is, the gendered social order” (Kennelly, Merz & Lorber, 2000, p. 600). Women learn what it means to be a mother, a wife and a female professional from the social influences they encounter in their lives. What it means to be a woman, or to be feminine, is constantly changing, as society is constantly redefining certain roles, expectations and characteristics (Risman, 2000). Therefore it is through these social changes that the definition of a woman transforms, not just because of fluctuating hormone levels (Risman, 2000).

There is no question that biology does affect us. When we are born, we have certain chemicals in our bodies, and certain physical attributes, that designate us as male or female. However, it is through social contexts that we develop and ‘play out’ our gender, so to speak. Our biological make-up means nothing without understanding the social situation or influences that surround it. I fully support this idea, and have experienced this both with the people I interact with, as well as myself. Your DNA only goes so far without also considering the social constructs in which you live.

{journal eight}

Introducing -- the metrosexual

Most of the guys in that video I found attractive.  They were muscular, tan, had a nice chiseled face and good hair...what's not to like?  In our society, there is a fine line between simply caring about your appearance and taking care of yourself, and being a little "too feminine" or being "too girly."  This is for boys, of course.  Girls seem to be able to get away with more in terms of showing outwardly characteristics that are deemed masculine.  Oh but not boys.  If a boy seems to have crossed that imaginary line of acceptance, they're not longer the attractive, chiseled buff guy, they're your gay best friend.

It's interesting that for all the things that guys can get away with but girls can not, guys simply can't get away with acting like a girl.  Hm, that has some pretty big implications I think.  It's considered sissy-like behavior for men to exhibit female tendencies...could this be because society says that acting like a woman is not a good thing?  Apparently caring about your teeth and not wanting hair in weird places (i.e. "womanly" things) means you are degrading yourself.  When is it going to be acceptable for women to show masculine tendencies AND men to show female tendencies?  Probably never.  Because acting like a man is a good thing, where as it seems that acting like a woman is not.

And for a little fun, if you're wondering how you yourself can become a metrosexual, check out these helpful tips from eHow:

• Get a theme song. Every metro man needs a good song to get him going. Listen to it in the mornings or before you go out for the evening. The music in your head will put a sexy swing in your step. Ricky Martin's "Shake Your Bon-Bon" is a good choice
• Manscape. Grooming is an absolute must. Get spa treatments. Take care of your skin. Put highlights in your hair. Complete removal of all body hair is best, but at the very least it should be neatly maintained. There is no such thing as a metrosexual with a unibrow or back hair. Keep hair only where it counts and make sure it is styled.
• Wear tight pants. You want to accentuate your good parts. It's better to go too tight than too big.
• 
  
  
  
  Worship. Kelly Clarkson is the patron saint of metrosexuals. As illustrated in the movie "40-Year-Old Virgin," you can call on Saint Kelly to help you get through painful beauty rituals.
  Observe the Metro City limits. Don't take grooming too far. Wearing lip balm is fine. Lip gloss, however, is not. Hair products are a staple. Hair extensions, on the other hand, are only for Rupaul.
  
  

{journal seven}

The Conservative Fundamentalist Christian movement known as a "purity ball" has grown in popularity in recent years, particularly in the South. This movement's mission is to have young girls make vows to their fathers that they will remain pure until marriage. For many that take this vow, this means no dancing or kissing until marriage.  As this 2007 Glamour article asks, would you pledge your virginity to your father?

Here is a short clip explaining purity balls, both from the father's and daughter's perspective:

Um...WHERE ARE THE BOYS?!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if girls should remain pure...shouldn't boys as well?  Or are boys exempt to this rule?  I suppose the counterpart to purity balls would be Promise Keepers.  But the difference is that those boys aren't pledging to someone that they will remain pure, they answer to themselves.  As the father in the video explained, girls "need" to have this connection and acceptance from their fathers.  Do girls need a formal ball in order to say no to sex?  Does having a little diamond ring on their finger somehow make them immune to the desires and crazy hormonal emotions that come with being a teenager and young adult?

And no matter the reasoning (religious, moral, etc.), one might ask, why it is the duty of the father to have his daughter vow in public that they won't have sex before marriage?  Shouldn't they be making that decision for themselves?  And if they decide to change their stance later on in life, isn't it their decision to make without being made felt guilty by their parents?

Here's a clip about the correlation of rising teen pregnancy rates and conservative/abstinence only states:

Very interesting stuff...

{journal six}

I went and saw the movie Easy A this weekend with my sister. Yes, it's a chick flick. Yes, I liked it. Don't judge me.

Anyway, I think the message of the movie 'good girl gone bad girl' is a great example of the 'bad girl' image we talked about in class. Here's a little preview of the movie:

We've got dark lipstick, provocative clothing, heels and scandalous behavior.  We've got ourselves a bad girl.  I know I could have found a billion movie clips that show bad girls being well, bad girls; but I chose this one because it shows the evolution of good girl to bad girl.  It shows that maybe we all have a little bad girl in us?

Here are a few examples of modern day bad girls in pop culture.  They smoke, wear black clothing and sky high heels, don't give a damn and are smokin' hot...the perfect bad girl.

Megan Fox

Actress -- mostly roles where she is the sexy bad girl

Taylor Momsen

Gossip Girl actress

Rocker

All around "Bad Ass"

Courtney Love

The original bad girl

I think that the girl girl vs. bad girl saga will always be prevalent in our society.  Bad girls are the ones guys fantasize about, good girls are the ones they bring home to mom and dad.  Bad girls are the mysterious, unstable, crazy lovers; good girls are the steady girlfriends because they don't have tons of issues...at least not on the surface.  I think deep down, good girls have a part of them that really are secret bad girls.  And maybe once and a while they let their closet bad girl come out and play.

{journal five}

I think the Cult of True Womanhood (CTW) is alive and well in our modern day society. I think among the working mothers and stay at home dads, there are individual families, groups and entire movements purpose is to preserve "true" womanhood. By true womanhood, I mean women placing their life ambitions on that of their husband, children and household. And that their sole purpose in life it to please their husband, procreate children and maintain a pleasant household.  Additionally, these characteristics go hand-in-hand with being extremely religious. Another attribute is purity -- being pure before marriage, during marriage and raising your children in a pure household.

Does this all sound familiar?
PIETY -- check
PURITY -- check
DOMESTICITY -- check
SUBMISSION --check

Yes, folks.  The cult of true womanhood still lives and breathes.

I think the show 19 Kids and Counting is a great example of the cult of true womanhood.  If you haven't seen the show before, here's a little recap:

• Jim Bob and Michelle have 19 children.
• They believe that God will bless them with as many children as He deems fit.  Therefore they do not use contraceptives, except for abstaining from sex for six weeks after a child is born (hence why they have some kids that are 13 months apart).
• They are all home schooled, the boys learn 'boy' skills and the girls learn 'girl' skills (in addition to reading, Bible studies, math and art).
• The girls all wear long skirts and have long hair.  The boys all look like Richie Cunningham from Happy Days.
• They only date people of the opposite sex, that share their same moral values.  And all their dates are supervised.
• Jim Bob Duggar says that woman should be treated like queens, while Michelle Duggar views J.B. as the decision-maker, breadwinner and all around ruler of the roost.
• The children are exposed to very limited T.V. and Internet.
• The girls seem to strive for marriage and procreating.  There isn't much talk about college and careers.  It's mostly about finding a husband that has a good career and can take care of you.

At the same time though, Michelle Duggar does make the decisions for the house.  She oversees things and manages everyone; much like we discussed in the cult of true womanhood.  Often women would be the keeper of the checkbook and oversee the family money, even though on the outside, it was the man who ruled everything.

This first clip is an interview with Michelle and J.B. about God blessing them with as many children as He deems fit:

And this second clip gives a good example of how the girls and boys grow up learning different activities and striving for different goals.  This also shows that the Duggars are not alone in the type of family movement:

*I'd also like to point out that their 19th child, Josie, was born at 25 weeks in December 2009.  She was just now released from the hospital, after having multiple surgeries and weighing 1 pound at birth.  Michelle got pregnant with Josie 4 months after she had just given birth to her 18th child.  J.B. and Michelle have been quoted in interviews saying that they'd love more children after Josie, if God wants to give them more children.  Did it every occur to anyone that maybe Josie was born so premature because Michelle's body's ability to carry a fetus to term was hindered because she had delivered so many children?  And her body hadn't even recovered from the previous one before she got pregnant with Josie?  Now, that could have nothing to do with why she was premature.  I think it is important, however, to address this issue, because there is a fine line between "God's will" and endangering the lives of your children.

{journal four}

I was hesitant to post about this because it's someone I know in real life, but I feel the topic is so relevant to this class, that it needs to be put out there.

I've lived in my particular home for about a year and half, and my landlord (a woman), takes care of the maintenance on the house.  She stops by from time to time to check things out and makes sure everything is okay.  My landlord is a lesbian.  We're all totally cool with this, my roommates and I.  My landlord only refers to her significant other as 'her spouse'.  Never 'oh my wife' or calls her by name.  The only way we found out her name (or that she was a woman, therefore making my landlord a lesbian) was that she came over to fix a leaky faucet a few months after we moved in.  Now, maybe my landlord didn't want us to know she was a lesbian.  Or maybe it's simply the way she refers to her relationship in public.  But obviously she knows that we know that her significant other is a woman, because she sent her over to our house to fix something.  But still, without fail, she calls her 'her spouse'.  It really isn't any of my business, it just makes me wonder what her reasons are for doing so.

That wasn't the original reason for bringing up my landlord, I got distracted and went off on a tangent, which often happens.  Anyway, my landlord and her spouse have an adopted child.  Their adopted child is biologically male, but in some form or another has an outward appearance of female.  Notice I'm very careful not to say that he acts like a female/wants to be a female, because maybe his gender identity or gender presentation differs from his perceived gender identity (yes yes, I pay attention in class!).  I've only encountered their child a few times, but whenever I have, they are in female-like clothing, with eye shadow and lipgloss on, and a pixie like haircut.  So, the reason I bring this up -- My landlord and her spouse have been having a lot of issues with their child, mental health issues.  I don't know if this stems from the gender identity issues, or from something else.  But it's enough to make them unable to come to the house often, or pretty much ever.  Several times my landlord has mentioned their problems to me though.  But every time, she refers to their child as "my child."  She did this when we moved in as well, when her child was standing right there.  She introduced them as "her child," and their name is gender neutral so that wasn't a hint either.  

The point I'm getting at is that it makes it difficult for us to figure out what pronoun to use when referring to our landlord's child because we have no idea what he or she prefers to be called.  Because their mother purposely doesn't use pronouns, we can't figure out the 'true' gender identity of her child.  I understand that this may be intentional, but it makes outsiders uncomfortable because we're unable to address the child in a more personal manner.  Even when asking about how her child is doing, I have to ask "how is your child?" instead of a more personal "how is your daughter/son doing?"

This all refers back to a conversation we had at the beginning of the semester.  About how gender blenders and/or benders dance on this border between male and female characteristics, sometimes making it very difficult for others to distinguish their correct gender identity.  And how sometimes, these people intentionally don't let on to what gender identity they prefer, for whatever reason.  It makes it difficult for others to connect with my landlord's child because they can't put a personifier on him or her. This can make people very uncomfortable.  And maybe it's a situation where they specifically don't want to subscribe to a particular gender.  And if that's what they want, then the rest of us will just have to get use to gender neutral terms.

It's all very much in the grey zone.  Gender identity, gender presentation and perceived gender identity don't all fit into need little boxes, with each one agreeing with the others.  They blur lines, mess each other up, cause miscommunications and confuse outsiders.

This video doesn't actually have anything to do with the above topic.
But this is what I think of whenever I say "the landlord."
...enjoy.
The Landlord--featuring Will Ferrell and Pearl the landlord (aka Will's daughter)

The Landlord from Will Ferrell

{journal three}

Am I a bad feminist?

Why do I ask this?  Well, I've considered myself a feminist for quite some time.  In fact, my conservative, Fox News loving father (whom I love dearly), loves to sigh and say "oh you liberal feminist hippie" when I disagree with him about something.  Anything, really.  It doesn't even have to do with gender issues.  I feel passionate about the empowerment and advancement of women (both naturally born women, and those that now call themselves women).  I firmly believe that a woman can "have it all" (a successful career and a family, etc.).  I get angry when I hear cases of glass ceilings or women being labeled as on the "mommy career path."

I get especially angry when I read articles like "The Cult of True Womanhood" or hear men say things like "a woman's place is in the kitchen."  It frustrates me when women go to college to simply get a MRS. degree (i.e. find a husband).

But do you want to know my deep dark secret?

...I get really excited thinking about planning future Thanksgiving meals for my family

...or decorating my first house

...or envisioning maybe not having to work one day and staying home with my kids

...or being proudly at my husband's side when he gets a promotion/wins a weekend soccer game/etc. 

My inner feminist gets really angry when I think these things...why must there be such turmoil in my mind?!

I think there is an inner conflict going on in the minds of many young/successful/educated/feminist-thinking women.  We think the "cult of true womanhood" is crap.  Except, sometimes we think some of the aspects or characteristics that go along with it are intriguing.  Or they just seem to fit into how we envision our future (and we like them in those thoughts).  And then we envision other feminists running after us with torches and wooden stakes.

Can we have both?  Can we fight for the rights of women while still maintaining some of the traditions that go along with womanhood?  Who decides whether or not those traditions are "acceptable" for an empowered woman, and which ones bring her down?  I suppose it's in the eye of the beholder.  To one person, you may be a respectful small business owner who loves being crafty with her kids.  To another person, you may have given up your dreams of growing your small business because you were too busy hanging out with your kids and making decorations for your home.  

I also think a lot of it is within yourself.  It is up to you to decide which label (if any) you're going to wear.  Yes, I believe in the empowerment of women.  Yes, I believe that women can have successful careers.  And yes, I believe it is okay for women to want to be domestic.  Yes, I think it's okay for women to want to focus on raising young babies for a little while and take some time off of work.  And I think you can do all of those things and still stand up in the name of women.  And I think you should be applauded for it.  Because really, us women can do whatever the heck we want, we've earned the right to work, create, procreate, cook, decorate, lead, invent, whatever.  I am woman, hear me roar.

{journal two}

During the first week of readings for the class, we read an article about the Chinese culture and traditional family obligations.  In that culture, it is simply understood that once parents reach a certain age, or if one becomes ill or dies, the daughter in the family drops everything to care for the remaining and/or sick parent(s).

I know that in other cultures this is also prevalent.  My grandmother has dementia and lives with a really sweet Romanian couple in Houston.  This couple moved here several years ago, and were trained in caring for elderly patients and running homes for them.  They have a special touch with older people, and have the ability to take care of them the way some others cannot.  The woman's mother back in Romania became ill recently.  She dropped everything to figure out a way to get her mother to the states, in order for her mom to come live in Houston with her.  I was talking to her the last time I went to visit my grandmother about the situation.  She said that in the Romanian culture, it is known that it is the daughter in the family's responsibility to care for sickly parents.  And if there is more than one daughter in the family, the responsibility is shared between them, but not so among the sons.

I find it interesting that American culture is not very much like that.  I mean yes, you find many elderly parents living with their sons and daughters' families.  But if that was a staple of our culture, nursing homes and assisted living facilities wouldn't really prosper here...yet they are everywhere.

My mother passed away unexpectedly this past December (2009).  And while my dad is by no means elderly, he was very dependent on my mom for things like taking care of the bills, his medicine, basic life functions, etc. (he's a bit of a scatter brain).  My sister is in high school, and while she is very mature for her age, she is still very dependent on others.  Right after her death, I felt like maybe I should take a semester or two off from graduate school and stay home to try to straighten things out.  Our finances, paperwork, home, everything was in shambles because her and her alone took responsibility for those things.  I thought that it was my responsibility as the oldest child (and to be honest compared to my dad the more stable adult) to take care of things.

But when I expressed my feelings/concerns with other family members, they simply stared in disbelief.  "Drop out of school? Move back home? What?!"  Most of this resistance came from my dad, who has always been my biggest supporter in terms of continuing my education.  The thought simply never occurred to anyone that I should stay home to help take care of things.  That doesn't happen all the time in the American culture.  Or at least it doesn't happen in my family.  I think the only person who might resent my decision is my sister.  And that is only because she now has taken on a whole new level of responsibility at home.  For example, she makes sure my dad has all his medicines, makes sure he doesn't leave the ice cream carton out on the counter before he goes to bed (this happens frequently), etc.  We are still trying to find a good balance.  I go back to Houston a lot to help out, and we are all trying to be very open and honest with each other in order to get through this.

But I wonder why family ties are so incredibly strong in some cultures, and not so much in others.  Now that isn't to say that I wouldn't have stayed at home if my family wanted/needed me to.  And that's also not to say that no one in the American culture cares about their parents.  It just seems that other cultures expect grown children to take care of and welcome their parents in whatever way possible, and that's just the way it is, no matter the circumstances.

{journal one}

So, I have a guilty pleasure.  I watch Teen Mom, every. single. week.  Yes, I am a well educated woman, but I need a little trash-like television to wind down at the end of a long day, don't judge me.  As much as some of the content on the show makes me cringe, I think some of it is a good representation of how a) having a child changes a girl/woman's life (more so than the father of that child) and b) how it is possible for teenage mothers to go on to lead fulfilling and successful lives.

One thing that really bothers me about the show is the PSA that always comes on halfway through.  The PSA is of Bristal Palin and her baby.  The overall message of the PSA is that she would have a really hard time raising her child if she wasn't rich/famous and have people to help her.  The end result is her in a dirty, empty room, wearing ratty clothes while her baby walks around aimlessly.  I feel this produces the message that without a lot of money and a famous mom, teenagers/young women will live in awful conditions and live miserable lives if they end up having a child.  I've added the PSA for your viewing pleasure.

I just feel that playing this PSA during this particular show is counter productive to the show's message.  Not one of the girls on the show has it easy, like Bristol Palin does.  Granted, some are smarter, work harder and are better mothers than others on the show, but they all struggle for what they have.

I also find it interesting that while the show does promote using contraceptives such as condoms and birth control, the PSA promotes no such thing.  It's motto is simply "pause before you play," which leads me to believe this is an abstinence only promotion.

And in case you haven't ever seen Teen Mom, here's a little montage of the previous season: