pantryslut | (no subject)

Middle School Girls Gone Wild, in the NY Times.

Having just (finally!) watched Little Miss Sunshine this stuff is on my mind. I have only a few comments to make.

1) Why is it that these articles always blame everything and anything for the sexual corruption of our little girls...except, um, patriarchy? Misogyny? If you prefer less loaded language: the lack of other available and visible opportunities for women in our culture? I mean, there's a wave at this in the very last paragraph, but it's almost a token gesture after all the previous handwringing about overpermissive parenting and such.

2) I hate to sound like a broken record, but you should have seen some of the sexual capers I was pulling in middle school, publicly and otherwise. Pre-teen girls (and boys) are very much in the thick of exploring their sexuality. If sexuality is represented as glittery eyeshadow and booty pants, that's what you'll see middle school girls wearing. And dancing in. At talent shows.

3) Significant pop culture signifiers of sexuality when I was a pre-teen girl include, not in order of importance: Duran Duran ("Girls on Film," "Hungry Like The Wolf"), Eurythmics ("Sweet Dreams," "Who's That Girl"), Prince (where to start?). Just sayin'.

4) OK, at my talent show I chose to paint myself with green and purple oatmeal and re-enact Michael Jackson's "Thriller" video instead. But you should have been at some of our practice sessions...

ETA: 5) And let's not even talk about how old I was when I first heard "Superfreak," or my positive reaction to it. I had half a clue as to what it was about. Honest.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Op-eds in the New York Times never blame the Patriarchy because, well, it's the Times. They can no more blame the Patriarchy for the sexualization of girls than the Wall Street Journal can blame Capitalism for the social depredations of poverty

My favorite sentence of the year. Thanks. :)

It strikes me that there's always been age-inappropriate modeling of this sort -- back when I was a kid, it was Barbie-based, I think.

It also strikes me as aspirational, cultual and imitative (duh, I know you know).

I don't know what I'd do if I was a parent, and I don't think it's okay, either. But I do think that part of this is also misunderstanding kids' sexuality, which is different than the adult aspirational sexuality marketed to them.

Yes and yes and yes. I don't think it's OK, I don't think it's merely lax parenting, I do think that it's a misunderstanding (and/or out-and-out denial) of kids' sexuality, I don't know what to do either but I do know that the discussion is entirely misframed.

I know some of what to do (and so do you, and so does

final_girl. Talk honestly to kids about sexuality: yours and their own and the culture's. Always point out inappropriate use of sexuality when you see it, taking the kid's age into account. Expect your children to have agency more or less from birth (ever watch a mom have a battle of wills with a 6-month-old? I have, and it's ugly). Encourage agency even when you're also saying, "No, you can't use that agency right now." Model respect for everyone, the child first and foremost.

That's how you get to the life some women I know grew up in, where their mother's rule about overnight guests (when the kids were fairly early in their teen years) was "Don't bring anyone home overnight that isn't going to be around for a while. If I have to deal with strangers at breakfast, they better not be one night stands. I've done that for you, and I expect the same courtesy."