blog 4

The articles discuss the idea that action figures may distort the male body image. Popes article takes a timeline of action figures and measures there changes over the years. The article concludes that action figures have become more muscular and defined over the years. However, they conclude more research needs to be done to connect action figures with steroid use and the warped ideal of mans image. The second article is disagreeing with Pope’s argument and insulting his research. Its not that he doesn’t disagree that the male image isn’t being distorted in the media however he believes it coming from people like Mark Maguire and other television figures. The second article is pretty much saying with everything else going on in the limelight you are going to research action figures, come on.
The tone of the first article is very informative and is presented almost like a journal entry. It relies on the facts and doesn’t really carry a voice. The second article however has a sarcastic tone, pretty much destroying everything the first article is saying. The second article gives a few examples of what else could be causing the male body image to be changing; it mainly suggests how ridiculous the argument is.
I think that GI Joe and action figures in general are not necessarily reflecting actual people. I think they allow you to believe they carry qualities beyond human capability, but at the same time we are still striving for these qualities. What’s fun about playing with an average looking man, nothing. I used to like wrestling action figures when I was younger because I could pretend I was a wrestler while playing with them. So in away, I can see Popes point. If I idealized my figures at a young age it might be imprinted in my head that the action figures body types are ideal as well.