Chickspotting


American playboy Joe Bovino
is coming out with his book “Field Guide to Chicks of the United States” this June. It’s similar to a bird watching book – but with women instead. Now, thanks to entertaining insights from someone who knows it all and has done it (them) all, every dude can set out in the wilderness and find themselves one of the 92 species of women. It’s a matter of either laughing or crying. Probably the first.”I’d read it to get a laugh,” says American student Steve, 25. “Because somethings are probably true, stereotypes come from somewhere. Maybe it will engender some kind of feminist revolt, which would be refreshing, since feminism is dead in the States.”

But Lindy West from online based women’s magazine Jezebel, seemed to have cried when the reading the press release (see further down). In her article she writes: “Bovino makes sure to let us ladies know that this book isn’t just for men—there’s a lot that women can learn from it too: “Single chicks can use this book to keep an eye on the competition and pick up valuable inside information.” Wow, thanks! Because if there’s one thing women need help with, it’s figuring out new ways to compare ourselves to other women.”

Either way, it seems this book will spur many debates when it hits the shelves this summer. The tone of the book seems to be sexist, but at the same time it appears to be taking a piss out of American stereotypes, which in effect could have positive impact on the feminist debate.

Here’s the press release:

“The “Field Guide to Chicks of the United States” is the must-have summer book as your readers hit the road this summer. The book will help you learn how to spot, identify, admire and appreciate American women all across the country.

Author Joe Bovino has identified 92 different “species” of women across the country. There’s Miss Texas, who is known for her big, blonde hair, large breasts, a natural tan and megawatt smile. She is frequently spotted in cowboy boots, short shorts and designer clothes and accessories. You’ll be able to spot her at a beauty salon, beauty pageant, country club or church. The Phillycat is a tiger on the outside and pussycat on the inside who cares mainly about family, friends and basic necessities. She’s likely spotted in a neighborhood bar, coffee shop or shopping mall. And on the West Coast, you are likely to encounter the Peace of Ass who is typically a personal trainer, psychologist or massage therapist. Her “song” is talking about inner peace, personal growth and meaningful relationships. Look for her in health food stores, yoga or Pilates studios, canyons, trails and spiritual centers. On the cover, you can see Afrodisiac, Country Biscuit and Taco Belle!

Bovino is giving his gift of Chickspotting to all mankind in this new book, which offers amusing insights into the most distinctive physical characteristics, vocalizations, behavioral tendencies and mating habits of American Chicks from regional and ethnic subculture (or species) across the country. Inside you will also find vivid illustrations of each Chick, color-coded range maps and other “Chick magnet” guidance.

Set up much like a bird guide, it sticks to the facts that Chickspotters can see out in the “wild.” Instead of identifying why women in America behave as they do or look a certain way – it examines what they do and how to spot them when they do it, all while admiring and appreciating them in their natural habitat.

As Bovino says – Birds are cute, but Chicks are better.

The “Field Guide to Chicks in the United States” will get men and women talking, and your readers will appreciate the facts that will surely help them improve their dating lives, and crack a smile while doing so.

The book is full of amazing full-color illustrations that you will have to see to believe. Men will want to see how many they recognize or can cross off their to-do list; and women will want to see if you can “spot” themselves in the book. Let me get a copy out to you to see for yourself, and I’d love to get your thoughts on the book’s concept. The book will be available for pre-order now at http://www.fieldguidetochicks.com and will be available this summer. Joe is available for interviews and the book is also available for give-a-ways.”

Pink is for Girls. Or is it?

Most expecting couples are expected to know their child’s gender and accordingly arrange the future kid’s colour scheme. Which mostly means: Pink for girls, and blue for boys. And ever since prenatal testing was made possible, the gender-stereotyped clothing of children boomed.

But it appears pink hasn’t always been on the girly side. Cracked.com recently posted a piece called “5 Gender Stereotypes that used to be the exact opposite“.

There you can find out about how pink and blue don’t seem to be biologically predestined preferences in boys and girls. Instead it seems like every sixty years or so, notions of what is masculine and feminine change.

Before World War I, girls and boys wore basically the same colours. But as it’s stated in a 1918 editorial from Earnshaw’s Infants’ Department,  it suddenly mattered. “There has been a great diversity of opinion on the subject, but the generally accepted rule is pink for the boy and blue for the girl. The reason is that pink being a more decided and stronger color is more suitable for the boy; while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl,” the editorial reads.

So blue for girls and pink for boys. It wasn’t until the 1940’s when (American) retailers decided that pink was a bigger hit for girls.

Jo B. Paoletti, author of Pink and Blue: Telling the Girls From the Boys in America, told the Smithsonian magazine it could have been the other way today. “The more you individualize clothing, the more you can sell,” she said. This is part of the first-wave feminists problem with pink. Paoletti also said that since it was an appointed colour for girls and femininity, the feminists often felt clothes were being used to push girls into their expected roles as women.

The colours Per Se don’t appear to be the problem. The problem arises instead when even babies have to fit in to a specific gender-stereotype. But according to Paoletti, as quoted on the Smithsonian Magazine, people are starting to move away from pink vs blue. “There is a growing demand for neutral clothing for babies and toddlers now, too.”

But many parents still think it’s important to dress their babies in either pink or blue. 34-year-old Janine knew she would have a boy, and immediately set out to buy clothes and decorate her son’s room. In blue. “Me and my partner both value traditions. And I don’t think that it’s harmful for boys and girls to be dressed in either pink or blue.” Janine thinks that if she were to dress her now 2-year-old son in pink or any other “girly” colour, people could get confused. “It’s hard to tell the gender of a baby. That’s why it’s so good to have two different colours. And our son won’t be confused either,” she says. While she doesn’t necessarily care about her sons future sexuality, she says there is a reason why society has chosen this colour codes. “Girls and boys mostly do like to play with different things. And if there are either manly toys or girly ones, in blue or pink, the differences between the two sexes and in effect sexualities becomes clearer. This also means it will probably be clearer for a child growing up to discover if he or she doesn’t fit in to the expected roles,” Janine claims. “Maybe blue was for girls before, but it’s not the colour that matters. It’s what it means.”