Summit Media tops nationwide TNS-Trends Newsstand Survey
August 18, 2008Summit Media tops nationwide TNS-Trends Newsstand Survey
For the second year in a row, Summit Media proves that it is the country’s top magazine publisher, as it tops the second nationwide TNS-Trends Newsstand Survey. The largest survey conducted which started in Metro Manila in 1999, the TNS-Trends Newsstand Survey covers has expanded to also include key cities all over the Philippines.
A total of 350 newsstands were surveyed, with 170 in Metro Manila, 50 in the rest of Luzon, 80 in Visayas, and 50 in Mindanao. Summit Media’s titles topped all categories—including Fashion, Men’s Lifestyle, Showbiz, Homemaker, Parenting, and Kids’, to name a few. The TNS-Trends Newsstand Survey covers actual sales of magazines. It answers the question: “How many magazines were you able to sell during the last 30 days?”
Here are the results:
Women’s Images in Magazine Advertisements: How Far Have They Come?
|
Women’s Images in Magazine Advertisements: How Far Have They Come? |
Advertising was named “the worst offender in perpetuating the image of women as sex symbols and an inferior class of human being” by the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (The Naked Truth 2). Advertisements, Elizabeth Barrette said, display women who have no resemblance to the majority of females; they have perfect skin, legs and hair, as well as flat stomachs. “I’ll tell you what: I don’t think most of those bodies even look lived-in” (Barrette 2001). Women have traditionally been depicted in magazine advertisements in ways that demean their importance, value, and intelligence. This practice affects the assumptions made about women and how they are treated in society.
When males constantly view images of women in certain roles, specifically as traditional housewives, they characterize them as possessing low intelligence, analytical ability, and rationality. They then generalize these characteristics to all women, which devalues women’s importance in society, notably the business world. This was an important finding in William Kilbourne’s 1990 article on his study of sex role stereotyping in advertisements and its potential impact on perceptions of women’s managerial attributes. Managerial attributes are necessary for business success; however, many women are not seen as possessing these because they are so often portrayed as housewives. Printed advertisements were studied because earlier research showed they have traditionally and frequently used sex role stereotyping (Kilbourne 25).
Undergraduate students, 103 males and 70 females, viewed images of females in either a housewife or professional role. The women in the professional roles were rated higher on their managerial attributes (“aggressive,” “likes complex tasks,” “leader, “has analytical ability,” and “rational”) by male and female subjects, which would be expected (Kilbourne 26, 29). Then, they were shown a non-role female, who was about 25 years old (Kilbourne 28).
The female subjects evaluations of the non-role female were not affected by the role portrayed in the advertisements. The males that had viewed women in professional roles evaluated the non-role female significantly higher than the males that had viewed women in housewife roles (Kilbourne 31). These findings are noteworthy because “substantial evidence exists which suggests that sex role stereotyping of women is an inhibiting factor in their assumption of managerial roles” (Kilbourne 25). Kilbourne concluded that advertisers should not use sex stereotypes, which could contribute to sex discrimination particularly in the workplace, because of their negative influence upon men’s perception of women’s managerial abilities (31). Since men control much of society, especially professional areas, it is key that they regard women as equally worthy and capable. Kilbourne’s study demonstrated what many earlier studies also concluded: women are not perceived as having positive attributes, such as intelligence and authority, largely due to women’s consistently unfavorable portrayal in advertisements.
Alice E. Courtney and Sarah Wernick Lockeretz noticed these “very limited and negative stereotypes of women in advertising” and conducted a study of gender stereotypes in 1970 magazine advertisements (Courtney and Lockeretz 92). The results found four main stereotypes that the advertisements portrayed, which are significant in themselves but even more so when viewed in light of Kilbourne’s study because of their restrictive effects on women. The stereotypes were: “A woman’s place is in the home,” “Women do not make important decisions or do important things,” “Women are dependent and need men’s protection,” and “Men regard women primarily as sexual objects; they are not interested in women as people” (Courtney and Lockeretz 94-95). From Kilbourne’s study, it is known that seeing these negative images, as well as the negative characteristics associated with them, can cause men to think that these portrayals truly represent women as a whole. When men view advertisements that signify that women do not make important decisions, they can internalize that they are not smart or capable enough to do so in real life. Moreover, when women are seen as sexual objects, they are treated as such in society, without regards to their many valuable attributes.
Findings of the study showed that women were seldom depicted in any working roles. Only 12% of workers in the magazine advertisements were women, although
This study by Courtney and Lockeretz showed that women were not often depicted in roles of power and intelligence but much more frequently in the role of homemaker (94). Women were not depicted in business roles, which demonstrate both power and intelligence. They were also not shown as capable of making expensive purchases, which appears to say that they do not have the intelligence or authority to make these decisions (Courtney and Lockeretz 93). Based on their findings, Courtney and Lockeretz’s were concerned about women’s intelligence and personality as reflected in advertising images and suggested that this be analyzed more in greater detail (95).
M. Venkatesan and Jean Losco conducted their own study of women in magazine ads from 1959 to 1971, in which they too recognized a need for more accurate portrayals of women that show their positive attributes and changing roles in society. “. . . the media have tended to project a severely limited view of women which is not reflective of the changes taking place in their lives” (Venkatesan and Losco 49). Venkatesan and Losco included a quote from Jules Henry in their article, which proves women’s importance to advertising and the consequences of this.
Without the pecuniary uses of women – their hair, their faces, their legs and all the wondrous variety of their personality and anatomy – the economy would perish [ . . .] But along with this monetization, along with this power to lure the economy to unimagined heights, woman has been degraded, Henry said (Venkatesan and Losco 49) .
The “woman as dependent on man” category remained relatively stable and prevalent throughout all the years studied, especially in men’s magazines (Venkatesan and Losco 51, 53).
In men’s and general magazines, “woman as sexual object” was the most frequently represented category (53%, 65%). Only 12% of advertisements in women’s magazines were in this category (Venkatesan and Losco 52). By showing women as simply a sexual object, women are devalued as human beings and valued only for their appearances. “Whenever advertisers reduce women to objects or dehumanize them, they engage in the act of publicly celebrating violence against women” (Lont 157).
“Woman as dependent on man” was the next most represented category for men’s magazines (48%), as well as general (27%) but only 14% of advertisements in women’s magazines were classified as this (Venkatesan and Losco 52). Women portrayed as housewives in women’s magazines decreased dramatically from 22.5% to 9.5% throughout the years studied. Advertisement depicting “women as physically beautiful” increased in both men’s and women’s magazines (Venkatesan and Losco 53).
The study showed that some demeaning portrayals of women are decreasing, such as “woman as sexual object,” but that these changes are primarily in women’s magazines only (Venkatesan and Losco 54). The three most frequently represented categories, “Woman as sexual object,” “woman as physically beautiful,” and “woman as dependent on man,” all show that women are valued greatly for their appearances but not all for their intellect or aptitude.
An analysis of 1983 magazine advertisements showed that women’s portrayals, in some ways, were becoming more positive and reflective of their improving status in society. Gary L. Sullivan and P.J. O’Connor updated Courtney and Lockeretz’s 1970 study, finding that women were making large gains toward being represented in professional and business roles (Sullivan and O’Connor 184), thereby lessening the impact of the stereotype, “Women do not make important decisions or do important things.” Women in 1983 were being depicting in roles as business executives, professionals, and midlevel managers, as well as salespeople (Sullivan and O’Connor 187). These positions reflect attributes of intelligence, power, and authority, making it very important that women are portrayed in these roles. The more society sees women in these positions of authority, it will increasingly attach these positive and valued characteristics to women, who are not often viewed in this manner.
From 1970 to 1981, female engineering enrollments increased tenfold, the number of female judges and lawyers 377%, women doctors 84%, and female bank officers and financial managers 256% (Sullivan and O’Connor 182).
Of the women shown in working roles, those in “professional” (15%) and “midlevel business” (33%) roles were found more frequently than expected (Sullivan and O’Connor 186). This is a drastic improvement for the “professional” category, which had zero women portrayed in this role in both 1958 and 1970 advertisements. The “midlevel business” category also had a steep increase, from 6% and 8% in 1958 and 1979 to 33% by 1983 (Sullivan and O’Connor 184).
Another unexpected finding of the researchers was that, of the women depicted in nonworking activities in advertisements, women in “decorative” roles (promoting products) increased greatly. Forty-eight percent of nonworking women were portrayed in “decorative” roles in 1958, falling to 31% in 1970 but then climbing to 60% in 1983 (Sullivan and O’Connor 184, 186).
Women were also portrayed in the 1983 advertisements in less submissive roles or postures. “Many ads depicted an image of independence for women” (Sullivan and O’Connor 187-188). The men “were not overseeing the activities of women,” but more often the people were shown as equals, which was a positive finding (Sullivan and O’Connor 188). This result signifies that women were beginning to be seen as more competent and able in their own right.
Tara L. Mclaughlin’s study of gender advertisements in 1996 noted that the frequent gender-role stereotypes in advertisements serve as socialization agents, since they “appear to represent all members of society, due to the fact that they are broadcast publicly” (Mclaughlin 1). This is essentially the conclusion Kilbourne reached in Advertisements “define social expectations and they also serve to educate the viewer as to acceptable versus unacceptable behaviors” (Mclaughlin 1). Due to this fact, if women are portrayed in a demeaning manner, society will treat them in this manner because it seems to be acceptable. This is often the case, as women are raped, beaten, and looked down upon because of their gender.
Mclaughlin’s study included advertisement analyses for Cosmopolitan, Us, and People (targeted to Whites), as well as Essence and Ebony (targeted to blacks) and used the categories from Erving Goffman’s 1976 study (Mclaughlin 4). The categories were used to determine what types of advertisements would be marketed toward black and white women (Mclaughlin 3). Due to previous research, it was hypothesized that “feminine touch” and “ritualization of subordination” would appear more often in the white-oriented magazines. “Feminine touch” meant that the model’s fingers or hands were caressing or holding an object, and “ritualization of subordination” included images of women lying down or in a cowering or submissive position (Mclaughlin 4-5).
Results showed that the magazines targeted to whites did have a much greater percentage of advertisements in the “ritualization of subordination” category (35.43%) than the magazines targeted to blacks (14.91%). The amount of advertisements in the “feminine touch” category was also higher in the magazines aimed at whites, although it was observed so infrequently that this was difference was deemed insignificant (Mclaughlin 5-8).
The subordination of women is still a prevalent image in magazine advertising, as the study found (Mclaughlin 6). This is very problematic for women because when they are constantly exposed to demeaning representations in advertisements, women themselves can experience “socially induced depression and lowered achievement aspirations” (Mclaughlin 7). “…This depression may be a chronic state,” as this trend of subordination has appeared consistently throughout the last 20 years (Mclaughlin 7).
A positive category that emerged from Mclaughlin’s study, but that was not analyzed, was full facial images of women in advertisements. In many of the advertisements classified as “other,” the women were “looking directly at the viewer, head and neck elevated with eyes focused straight ahead” (Mclaughlin 
.
I found this emerging theme of full facial portrayals fascinating, especially considering that there were also high percentages of women in images of subordination. As a result, I decided to analyze various images of submission and this more positive image that seems to be appearing in current magazine advertisements. I based some of my categories on Goffman’s (from Mclaughlin’s study) and also included a category to deal with sex role stereotyping, since it has been so consistently prevalent and is simply another way of stripping women of their power.
I chose my first category, size, because it is a widespread assumption that virtually all women portrayed by the media are thin. I wanted to see if this indeed true; one hopes that other sizes are increasingly represented since society is becoming more accepting of changes. The average woman is 5 feet, 4 inches, weighing 144 pounds. This is not the image that is often marketed to society, which has resulted in $30 billion of annual revenue for the diet industry (Lont 152). Mclaughlin’s study found many images of women in submissive positions (Goffman’s category of “ritualization of subordination”) so I included this category in my study, although I expect to find few instances of this, based on my personal magazine reading experiences in the past. I think that is an image that is becoming less prevalent in magazine advertisements because I do not recall seeing many. (Only advertisements in which the woman’s whole body could be seen were coded.)
I also decided to look for full facial images of women because it was an encouraging emerging theme in the 1996 advertisements. Facial images with something blocking the face were analyzed because I had never noticed this in magazines, but after reading Jean Kilbourne’s comments on this, I was intrigued by the implications of it. Advertisers, she said, “are also selling the idea that women should be silent” (Can’t Buy My Love 3), which had never occurred to me. I also chose to study images where women’s were closed or averted simply because I had recently noticed this in various magazines and to me, it shows complete deference and submission. Dismemberment is a category in the study because it is such a demeaning and objectifying portrayal of women, which I, optimistically, hypothesize to be a decreasing image in advertisements. It perpetuates “the concept that a woman’s body is not connected to her mind and emotions” (Dines and Humez 123).
Women depicted in business roles are a category because it has been so rarely portrayed in the past. The latest study I looked at that dealt with this image was of 1983 magazine advertisements. In these, images of women in business roles were increasing but were still depicted disproportionately as housewives. In my study, I expect to find that women in business roles are prevalent in the magazine advertisements. Finally, I chose to study images of woman in advertisements that function simply as a testament of beauty because this was very frequently represented in Venkatesan and Losco’s study. I think that this category will also be well represented in magazine advertisements today because of the many products women are pressured to buy to stay young and beautiful.
My hypothesis is that full facial images, eyes closed or averted, and women in business roles will be the most frequently represented categories, while images of women in submissive positions will be the least represented.
Categories:
1. Size: This is a subjective category of females as either thin, average, or plus-
size. I want to see if indeed there are significant numbers of advertisements showing unattainable (for many women) figures.
2. Submissive positions: The female is cowering, canting (contorted in unusual positions), or clowning. This is a direct representation of how females are often characterized as meek, powerless, weak, submissive, and silly.
3. Full facial images: The female is looking directly at the viewer with her head and eyes focused straight ahead.
4. Facial images in which something is blocking part, or all, of the face: The female’s hand is covering her mouth, her hair is falling over her face or eyes, or she is holding an object that obstructs her image.
5. Eyes cast down, away, or closed: This is another representation of females as submissive and passive.
6. Dismemberment: Images where only one part of a female’s body is featured.
7. Business roles: The female, by her clothes, actions, or setting, appears in a business or working role.
8. Physically beautiful: The female portrayed is illustrating her beauty, as a result of cosmetic products.
I analyzed three magazines: People, Good Housekeeping, and Seventeen. The September 2002 issues were used in all three magazines because September is synonymous with “back-to-school,” which often means an increase in product advertisements because people are buying many new items. In addition to the September issues, I also analyzed the most current issue available of each magazine. For Seventeen and Good Housekeeping, this was the November 2002 issue and for People (a weekly magazine) it was
I chose Good Housekeeping because I saw an advertisement where woman, wearing lots of make-up, had a tissue covering part of her mouth. I was looking at my mother’s copy after I had read an article about images in which a woman’s mouth was covered by something in a symbolic attempt to silence her (Can’t Buy Me Love 3). This surprised me that such an image would be right there in a magazine for women. From this sight, I decided to create that as a category and also analyze Good Housekeeping. It was also chosen because it is widely read by many adult women. Finally, I analyzed Seventeen because of its large teen-age girl audience. I want to see if magazines with different primary audiences treat females’ images differently. I categorized only advertisements for products or television shows that only portrayed women, alone or in groups (no males were present). As a result, numbers and percentages of images in certain categories are out of the number of advertisements analyzed in that particular magazine, not out of the total advertisements in a magazine. For example, this means that out of all advertisements in People showing only women, this percentage were in this category.
See Figures 1, 2, and 3. (Percentages do not necessarily add to exactly 100 because they were rounded to the nearest whole number to facilitate easy comprehension.)
My analysis found that the category of full facial images was the most frequently represented in all three magazines; its images made up 21% of the advertisements analyzed in People, 28% in Good Housekeeping, and 32% in Seventeen. Products commonly featured in full facial images were: make-up, moisturizers, face wash, bras, jeans, perfume, hair coloring products, nutritional supplements, and shoes.
The second most frequently represented category, in People (16%) and Good Housekeeping (16%), was images of eyes cast down, away, or closed. Products often illustrated here were: shampoos, body washes, clothes, and underwear. In People, women as physically beautiful made up 16% of the advertisements analyzed. The advertisements for women as physically beautiful were almost all for make-up, shampoo, and conditioner.
In Seventeen, the second most represented category was thin women (16%). There were 25 thin women pictured, 13 average, and zero plus-size women. In Good Housekeeping, however, there were more average women (14%) pictured than thin (10%), although only one plus-size woman. People had equal depiction of thin and average women but no plus-size women.
It was indeed true that full facial images were the most frequently depicted images in all three magazines, and eyes closed or averted was the second most frequently portrayed image in People and Good Housekeeping. To a great extent, my hypothesis about these two categories proved correct; from my study, Mclaughlin seems to be correct in speculating that full facial images are an emerging theme in magazine advertisements.
I was wrong in my hypothesis about images of women in business roles; there were virtually none in all three magazines analyzed. People and Good Housekeeping each had one, while Seventeen had zero.
Images of women in submissive positions were rarely shown but they were not always the least represented category, which I thought would be true. People had zero images in this category, but Good Housekeeping had one and Seventeen had four. Good Housekeeping’s advertisement showed a woman contorted with her back arched backwards, with her hands touching the backs of her ankles. This was a Tylenol PM advertisement and she appeared to be in some sort of Yoga pose. In Seventeen, the advertisements in this category were for Reebok, Skintimate shaving gel, Jovan White Musk perfume, and a Jansport backpack. The Jansport advertisement was the strangest of all of these; a girl was pictured wearing a backless shirt with her arms shielding her head and face. In one shot, she was not even wearing the backpack. She appears to be dancing around in her backpack in the other shot. This is an example of how such advertisements make the woman appear as if she is cowering from something violent, and here, she also looks rather silly (dancing around in her book bag, looking as if she’s not even wearing a shirt) – an indication of clowning. This image was in the September issue of Seventeen, obviously directed toward girls’ back-to-school shopping for backpacks.
Facial images in which something was blocking the face was another category that was well represented in both Seventeen (13%) and People (14%). Here, in shampoo advertisements, women often had hair over their face. Other images would black-out certain parts of the woman’s face and feature only certain areas, such as in make-up or face wash advertisements.
The analysis of the three 2002 magazines led me to conclude that although they have different primary audiences, their representations of women are extremely similar in appearance and frequency. Seventeen, aimed at teen-age girls, has a slightly higher percentage of full facial images but also has a slightly higher percentage of thin women than People and Good Housekeeping. The full facial images are positive, especially for teen-age girl audiences to view. They are at an impressionable age, and these images project intelligence and alertness, which has traditionally not been depicted for women. Women’s bodies and their body parts are more often than their faces in advertising, though the opposite is true for men. This is very significant because “facial views are perceived by the viewer as projecting intelligence and ambition while body views are not” (Mclaughlin 2). This “. . . may lead to a disparity with regard to the degree of intelligence that these images project with men being perceived more favorably than women” (Mclaughlin 2).
The fact that Seventeen also shows more thin women than the other magazines (People, aimed at all adults and Good Housekeeping, at adult women) is unfortunate but expected. Young girls are increasingly getting the idea that they must be skinny and that skinny is the only size that is beautiful. Magazines, especially the ones made for them, reinforce this idea constantly.
The images in the magazines analyzed reflect the fact that women’s status in society is changing and some negative portrayals are diminishing, though some clearly remain. The past studies that I looked at found many images of women in submissive positions to be very prevalent, while my study found very few cases of such (Sullivan and O’Connor, Mclaughlin). Moreover, many magazine advertisements analyzed in past studies depicted women as sexual objects (Venkatesan and Losco). One way of portraying this idea is by dismembering women’s body parts; showing only pieces of them. These images in my study represented a very small percentage of the magazine advertisements that I analyzed. This is a very good sign because dismembering causes people to view women in pieces, not as a whole, complete person. When they are viewed as pieces, this leads to objectification. “Convicted rapists have been known to justify their rapes because their victims didn’t seem human to them – they were just objects” (Lont 154).
The high percentage of full facial images of women is a positive step in portraying women in a direct, less submissive manner. A negative depiction of women that was relatively prevalent is the “eyes cast down, away, or closed,” which does portray the woman as quiet and submissive. Also, the fact that there were virtually no women in business roles is very unrepresentative of today’s society. Certainly, women are becoming more positively portrayed in magazine advertisements, but there are still great improvements to be made in the many negative images that remain, as they in turn reinforce negative stereotypes. This is important to recognize because while the full facial images depict women as alert and intelligent, the negative images (dismemberment, few women in business roles, eyes closed or looking away) depict women as passive and unimportant. From Kilbourne’s study, it is thought that viewing women in certain ways will affect how men characterize and treat them (31). Therefore, in order for women to be treated equally with men, it is necessary to continue erasing these demeaning images of women.
If I conducted this study again, I would also analyze magazine advertisements where women were depicted in a housewife role. I did not notice any of these images when I was analyzing my magazines, but it would be interesting to compare these to the very few images of women in business roles. This category of women in housewife roles would include women shown doing housework and those in advertisements with children (depicting motherly roles). It is my opinion that magazines are just not showing women in either of these roles very frequently. I noticed that even advertisements that are for cleaning supplies show men using them in addition to women, which seems to be a big step in at least trying to improve existing stereotypes. My study showed that women are not being portrayed in business roles, but I think that in the magazines I analyzed, women are not portrayed often as housewives either.
There were two advertisements that stood out more than all the others I analyzed, one of which I found extremely demeaning and shocking. Full facial images are much more positive portrayals of women because they can depict assertiveness and alertness; however, one full facial image was particularly offensive and I was shocked to see it. There was a Lily of France bra advertisement in the Oct. 21 issue of People (38) that shows a woman lying down with her stomach and chest exposed. She, of course, is wearing the featured bra. In small type across the bottom of the advertisement the copy says, “Turn a ticket into a warning,” implying that if a woman is wearing this wonderful push-up bra, all she has to do is pull up her shirt. The policeman will be so pleased with her voluptuous breasts that he will not give her a ticket. This advertisement shows that even such positive portrayals as full facial images can also be used in demeaning and humiliating ways.
The second advertisement that attracted my attention was for
There were two categories that I analyzed that I found to be disturbing and worrisome – facial images in which something is blocking the face and eyes cast down, away, or closed. The fact that these are relatively commonly portrayed is alarming to me because they are both images that show women as easily controllable. They are both very subtle ways of diminishing women’s authority and power. The woman is so weak and passive that she cannot look straight at the camera or show her whole face. These are not blatantly sexist; I had never noticed these images before I conducted my study. Here in lies the problem; many other women probably do not see them on a conscious level either. However, everyone, men and women alike, are internalizing these to some extent on a subconscious level, which can then affect thoughts about women, as well as how they are treated.
Before I conducted my study on women’s images in magazine advertisements, I often looked at advertisements for the products but never at the women in them. The study has given me a newfound interest in this area and I constantly look for the types of advertisements that I analyzed. I think that this realization that negative images are out there is the first step to eradicating the problem. Many women, just as I, may not realize that there are so many degrading and demeaning images in magazine advertisements. I think that making women aware – telling and teaching them about the subject – is the most important move in getting such images removed all together from advertisements. Jessica Norling, in an article written for young girls, said:
But what stands out most in my memory are the images of girls and women. They looked flawless and perfect. I wanted to look just like the models. I compared myself constantly to these images. These images made me believe that if I could only look just like the models, my life would be perfect – I’d be popular, rich, and beautiful (1).
Not only do magazine advertisements often portray women’s beauty as their sole valuable characteristic to men, throwing intelligence and worth aside, but these images also harm women themselves. They cause women to focus intensely on how to remain beautiful at all points in their life, often making them feel as if this is the only thing men care about in them. “All too often, the woman depicted in ads and commercials is a lifeless mannequin, a fantasy unattainable by most of the billions of women in the world” (Lont 123). Magazine advertisements must continue to be monitored and improved to better men’s thoughts and treatment of women, but just as importantly, to better women’s images of themselves as valuable, intelligent people without any need of altering their bodies.
I Thought Once How Theocritus Had Sung-Elizabeth Barrett Browning
I thought once how Theocritus had sungOf the sweet years, the dear and wished-for years,
Who each one in a gracious hand appears
To bear a gift for mortals, old or young:
And, as I mused it in his antique tongue,
I saw, in gradual vision through my tears,
The sweet, sad years, the melancholy years,
Those of my own life, who by turns had flung
A shadow across me. Straightway I was ’ware,
So weeping, how a mystic Shape did move
Behind me, and drew me backward by the hair;
And a voice said in mastery, while I strove,—
“Guess now who holds thee!”—”Death,” I said, But, there,
The silver answer rang, ”Not Death, but Love.”
I loved her for that she was beautiful-Philip James Bailey
I loved her for that she was beautiful; And that to me she seem’d to be all Nature, And all varieties of things in one:
Would set at night in clouds of tears, and rise
All light and laughter in the morning; fear
No petty customs nor appearances;
But think what others only dream’d about;
And say what others did but think; and do
What others dared not do: so pure withal
In soul; in heart and act such conscious yet
Such perfect innocence, she made round her
A halo of delight. ’Twas these which won me;—
And that she never school’d within her breast
One thought or feeling, but gave holiday
To all; and that she made all even mine
In the communion of love: and we
Grew like each other, for we loved each other;
She, mild and generous as the air in spring;
And I, like earth all budding out with love.
Feelings-By Samantha James
Sometimes I sit and stareI think and hope that life would be fair
Nobody seems to get it
They just have no clue
That I can be a friend that is really true
Everybody whispers
All the laughs, the jokes, nobody cares
The way they all make fun of my frizzy red hair
If only life could be easy
I wish that life could be fun
I wish I didn’t have to run and hide
