Sign in with FacebookWill Byrnes's Reviews > Cinderella Ate My Daughter: Dispatches from the Front Lines of the New Girlie-Girl Culture
Cinderella Ate My Daughter: Dispatches from the Front Lines of the New Girlie-Girl Culture
by Peggy Orenstein
by Peggy Orenstein
Will Byrnes's review
bookshelves: economics, non-fiction, psychology-and-the-brain, public-health, brain-candy
Apr 02, 13
bookshelves: economics, non-fiction, psychology-and-the-brain, public-health, brain-candy
Read from September 29 to October 03, 2010
UPDATED - 4/2/13 - see link at bottom
Once upon a time it was considered attractive for women to have some actual flesh on them; small boys wore pink dresses while little girls wore blue; childrens television shows were not designed specifically to sell toy lines, and manufacturers did not push pink-colored merchandise for a vast range of products to enhance their bottom lines. Pre-teen girls were not encouraged to dress like streetwalkers and bump and grind like exotic dancers. Surely girls were never presented with a global range of options and encouragement to pursue their dreams, career-wise that is, unfettered by domestic and sexual expectations. But the environment today is different in type, comprehensiveness and degree from the world of our mothers.
When my youngest was a wee lass, she was fond of presenting herself to anyone who would attend, resplendent in a T-shirt that sported a bevy of Disney heroines, and demand of her audience, “Who’s your favorite princess?” I still had visions back then of her playing hardball on a mostly boys team, and build on her utter fearlessness on the monkey bars to work up to a bit of serious climbing some day. I viewed her princess fixation as a passing phase. Yes, her favorite color was pink, and it is only recently, well into teen years, that her favored palette has broadened. (Whew!) But my daughter was hardly alone in her predilections. She (and her parental units) had been deluged with a marketing environment that has forced little girls into a pink mindset like a prince trying to stuff an evil-stepsister foot into a tiny glass slipper. So what’s the deal with all the pink that is engulfing today’s young girls? Peggy Orenstein, parent to a budding princess of her own, took notice, did some investigation and came up seeing red. Cinderella Ate My Daughter tells what she found.
She covers a wide swath. Orenstein wonders what is actually wrong with the Cinderella image. Nothing at all if your goal is to be valued solely for your looks and to be rescued from a poor existence by a handsome and wealthy guy. There can be no higher value in a princess than materialism. She also notes that princesses are not exactly the girl-bonding sort. There is very little room on a throne. Hardly a recipe for winning friends and influencing people. Self realization has been replaced by self-marketing.
One subject that permeates is the impact of corporate marketing. From a Disney exec’s multi-billion dollar eureka moment, when he came up with the notion of selling princess clothing and sundries to a huge girl market, to the sexualized dolls and gear of the late 20th and early 21st century, to the “pinking” of everything, top-down product pushing has had a major impact on the world. Do we really need pink soccer balls? Pink baseball caps? Casey Stengel is spinning in his grave. The reason for this silliness is nothing less than the profit motive. If you can sell more product by differentiating into multiple versions, it is nothing less than the American way. Orenstein talks with a marketing exec who credits “the pink factor” with increasing sales. But the downside to advanced marketing prowess and relentless market segmentation is actual long run harm. Pink is associated with all things girly-girl. And that carries baggage. A fixation on pink makes it that much tougher for girls to be all they can be if who they are falls outside the extant confines of what it means to be a girl. Ostracism for being different is quite real.
And having primed girls to define themselves by the things they buy, the market now offers them more and more sexualized products. Bratz sashayed onto the market as a sort of slut-Barbie, to be followed by others from that sort of stable. Whereas dolls were once a sign of innocence, many of them have become something much darker. Don’t be fooled by products flogged as “sassy.” Take a look in your magic mirror and see that “sassy” translates to “sexy.”
Orenstein looks also at where nature and nurture diverge, reporting on some very surprising studies. Can the brain be changed by one’s environment? Is gender preference for types of toys nature or nurture? Are children maturing faster today than they have in the past?
There is also a wonderful discussion of the Brothers Grimm. And you will be surprised to hear of the impact one former president had on things girlish.
As with the BP disaster, the impact of all this gender stereotyping and sexual hyping will be emerging for many years to come. For our young girls, it might be better not to be in the pink if it means increasing sexualization of childhood and decreasing social, educational, recreational and career options due to having to survive in an ofF-red monoculture. When short term financial gain is all, and long term consequences are merely corporate externalities, not only are our girls harmed, but our nation suffers. What talents, what potential progress might be stifled by a culture that steers girls into a curved cattle chute that dissuades difference? Such a culture does less to empower and more to make young women handmaids to the bottom line.
Perhaps in some future column or later edition of the book, I would like to see more on sociobiology. We need a baseline. If girls are being moved away from some natural state, what can science tell us about what the parameters of that natural state might be? What behaviors are inherited from our cave-dwelling or pre-agricultural days?
But that is a quibble. This is an outstanding, if alarming, overview of just how the world is conspiring against our girls, covering many areas of interest, from neuroplasticity to changing views on weight, from the impact of Barbie and American Girl dolls to girls in on-line culture. Cinderella Ate my Daughter is a compelling read, but it is not a pretty picture.
====================UPDATES
2/4/11
I came across a really good review of this in the NY Times. I am so jealous.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/boo...
And I hear that Cinderella will be making its well-deserved way onto the NYT bestseller list 'ere long.
9/14/11
I received this alarming bit this morning, a serious eye-roller. What are these people thinking!
3/30/12 - Puberty Before Age 10: A New ‘Normal’?, by Elizabeth Weil - A fascinating article on early development in girls
12/2/12
I just came across this excellent GR review by my pal Cathy
3/29/13
This report on sexualization of girls from American Psychological Association is chilling stuff
4/2/13
This seemed the best review in which to place this link. My son posted it on his FB page. From Womens Press, Losing my religion for equality…by Jimmy Carter
Once upon a time it was considered attractive for women to have some actual flesh on them; small boys wore pink dresses while little girls wore blue; childrens television shows were not designed specifically to sell toy lines, and manufacturers did not push pink-colored merchandise for a vast range of products to enhance their bottom lines. Pre-teen girls were not encouraged to dress like streetwalkers and bump and grind like exotic dancers. Surely girls were never presented with a global range of options and encouragement to pursue their dreams, career-wise that is, unfettered by domestic and sexual expectations. But the environment today is different in type, comprehensiveness and degree from the world of our mothers.
When my youngest was a wee lass, she was fond of presenting herself to anyone who would attend, resplendent in a T-shirt that sported a bevy of Disney heroines, and demand of her audience, “Who’s your favorite princess?” I still had visions back then of her playing hardball on a mostly boys team, and build on her utter fearlessness on the monkey bars to work up to a bit of serious climbing some day. I viewed her princess fixation as a passing phase. Yes, her favorite color was pink, and it is only recently, well into teen years, that her favored palette has broadened. (Whew!) But my daughter was hardly alone in her predilections. She (and her parental units) had been deluged with a marketing environment that has forced little girls into a pink mindset like a prince trying to stuff an evil-stepsister foot into a tiny glass slipper. So what’s the deal with all the pink that is engulfing today’s young girls? Peggy Orenstein, parent to a budding princess of her own, took notice, did some investigation and came up seeing red. Cinderella Ate My Daughter tells what she found.
She covers a wide swath. Orenstein wonders what is actually wrong with the Cinderella image. Nothing at all if your goal is to be valued solely for your looks and to be rescued from a poor existence by a handsome and wealthy guy. There can be no higher value in a princess than materialism. She also notes that princesses are not exactly the girl-bonding sort. There is very little room on a throne. Hardly a recipe for winning friends and influencing people. Self realization has been replaced by self-marketing.
One subject that permeates is the impact of corporate marketing. From a Disney exec’s multi-billion dollar eureka moment, when he came up with the notion of selling princess clothing and sundries to a huge girl market, to the sexualized dolls and gear of the late 20th and early 21st century, to the “pinking” of everything, top-down product pushing has had a major impact on the world. Do we really need pink soccer balls? Pink baseball caps? Casey Stengel is spinning in his grave. The reason for this silliness is nothing less than the profit motive. If you can sell more product by differentiating into multiple versions, it is nothing less than the American way. Orenstein talks with a marketing exec who credits “the pink factor” with increasing sales. But the downside to advanced marketing prowess and relentless market segmentation is actual long run harm. Pink is associated with all things girly-girl. And that carries baggage. A fixation on pink makes it that much tougher for girls to be all they can be if who they are falls outside the extant confines of what it means to be a girl. Ostracism for being different is quite real.
And having primed girls to define themselves by the things they buy, the market now offers them more and more sexualized products. Bratz sashayed onto the market as a sort of slut-Barbie, to be followed by others from that sort of stable. Whereas dolls were once a sign of innocence, many of them have become something much darker. Don’t be fooled by products flogged as “sassy.” Take a look in your magic mirror and see that “sassy” translates to “sexy.”
Orenstein looks also at where nature and nurture diverge, reporting on some very surprising studies. Can the brain be changed by one’s environment? Is gender preference for types of toys nature or nurture? Are children maturing faster today than they have in the past?
There is also a wonderful discussion of the Brothers Grimm. And you will be surprised to hear of the impact one former president had on things girlish.
As with the BP disaster, the impact of all this gender stereotyping and sexual hyping will be emerging for many years to come. For our young girls, it might be better not to be in the pink if it means increasing sexualization of childhood and decreasing social, educational, recreational and career options due to having to survive in an ofF-red monoculture. When short term financial gain is all, and long term consequences are merely corporate externalities, not only are our girls harmed, but our nation suffers. What talents, what potential progress might be stifled by a culture that steers girls into a curved cattle chute that dissuades difference? Such a culture does less to empower and more to make young women handmaids to the bottom line.
Perhaps in some future column or later edition of the book, I would like to see more on sociobiology. We need a baseline. If girls are being moved away from some natural state, what can science tell us about what the parameters of that natural state might be? What behaviors are inherited from our cave-dwelling or pre-agricultural days?
But that is a quibble. This is an outstanding, if alarming, overview of just how the world is conspiring against our girls, covering many areas of interest, from neuroplasticity to changing views on weight, from the impact of Barbie and American Girl dolls to girls in on-line culture. Cinderella Ate my Daughter is a compelling read, but it is not a pretty picture.
====================UPDATES
2/4/11
I came across a really good review of this in the NY Times. I am so jealous.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/boo...
And I hear that Cinderella will be making its well-deserved way onto the NYT bestseller list 'ere long.
9/14/11
I received this alarming bit this morning, a serious eye-roller. What are these people thinking!
3/30/12 - Puberty Before Age 10: A New ‘Normal’?, by Elizabeth Weil - A fascinating article on early development in girls
12/2/12
I just came across this excellent GR review by my pal Cathy
3/29/13
This report on sexualization of girls from American Psychological Association is chilling stuff
4/2/13
This seemed the best review in which to place this link. My son posted it on his FB page. From Womens Press, Losing my religion for equality…by Jimmy Carter
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Cinderella Ate My Daughter.
sign in »
Comments (showing 1-50 of 62) (62 new)
The book is out in either January, according to the Harpercollins site, or February, according to Orenstein's. She has been working in this field for quite a while and knows of what she speaks. she brings a lot of diverse information together into one fascinating package. Good stuff.
Wow, fantastic review! This sounds like something I really need to read. I've been complaining about this type of thing for a loooong time.
Will, Great review, although I am interested in your comment that it would be interesting to hear more about sociobiology. My concern is that talking about what is "natural" and "unnatural" can only ever lead to confusion because they presume the existence of a hypothetical garden of Eden type scenario where we lived in communion with nature and our society reflected that.
Feminists have been struggling for some time with the nature vs nurture argument, and while I can acknowledge that it is an interesting question, one of the problems with the nature vs nurture argument is that it throws the emphasis on causes and not what is actually happening. For instance, I have heard arguments where the author protests that women have a natural affinity for pink because they are "naturally" evolved to pluck berries off bushes while men wandered under the blue sky hunting, completely ignoring the fact that a mere hundred years ago pink and blue were associated with the opposite sex.
While sociobiology is admittedly interesting, how will you allow it to change your opinion? The nature versus nurture argument is often cited, but does the fact women were in a subordinate or different position at some hypothetical point in the past justify current subordination or compulsory difference? Remember: slavery was once considered natural too.
Wow. Thanks for the question. It is always a happy thing to discover that someone has actually read the words I put out there. Given the venue, it seems appropriate to begin with book references.
Supersense, by Bruce Hood, has a lot of information on how the way we are wired feeds in to certain fears and beliefs, based on human history. While he does not go into (at least as far as I recall) gender differences, the sort of analysis he applies is fascinating. I wonder if the same sort of science might tell us something about how human males and human females are hard-wired.
Recognizing that neuroplasticity allows for considerable rewiring does not eliminate the possibility that there are wires that natural selection has left in place, while allowing the withering of others.
Another interesting book, The Other Side of Desire by Daniel Bergner, looks at what we consider sexual oddities. This book questions what constitutes normalcy. Less science than in Hood's book, but still addressing the notion of what is hard-wired and what is not.
My favorite of this sort is Richard Wright's The Moral Animal. He covers a lot of territory in how humans evolved. Throw in some Richard Dawkins as well, for good measure.
As the father of two daughters, I need every edge I can find in attempting to be the best parent I can, and understanding where nature, via chemistry, natural selection or some other process, has drawn lines hard or soft, would be helpful.
Nature vs Nurture arguments often suffer the fate of most black-vs-white scenarios, a loss of nuance and the enslavement of science by ideology. We are born as biological entities, so there must be some impact from that. What is that impact? What parts of our genetic inheritance enhance or impede our ability to survive and thrive in the world of the 21st century? Nature is what we arrive with. Neuroplasticity allows Nurture to massage those ingredients into contemporary people, whether the contemporary is the 21st or 18th century. Just as mapping the genome allows science to address problems at a level deeper in the core than previously possible, (theoretically, anyway) so too a knowledge of our brains, maybe a mapping, but at least an understanding, will better allow us as a species to know what we are dealing with. What is done with that knowledge is a whole other can of worms, but knowing would be a good place to start.
BTW, I am firmly of the belief that the Garden of Eden is where Jeannie tends her flowers.
I am not denying that biology can tell us interesting things about our bodies and the way we interact with others, I just believe that biology cannot reveal a natural gender role which will be "right" for all people for all time. Because biology cannot give such a conclusive answer the evidence which biology gives us will always be interpreted subject to the preexisting opinions of the investigator. The failure of biology to conclusively explain homosexuality and the politicisation of the various and conflicting explanations is an example of how preexisting views can taint the interpretations of such studies.It's pretty awesome that you are interested in the problems of positive role models for girls for the sake of your daughters. Angry feminists have always and will always serve their place, but it is the awakening of the entirety of society to the problems strict interpretations of gender roles create and reinforce which will ultimately rewrite those roles.
I doubt that any role is right for anyone all the time, male or female, let alone for entire genders. (Ok, except for bearing children. That is definitely an exclusive.) I agree that pre-existing and/or self-serving notions will always interpret (or completely ignore) science in whatever ways suit. That does not make science illegitimate. Nor do incomplete answers from biology argue for not pursuing complete ones. Don't you think it would be interesting to know where male and female brains differ? And although researcher bias is very real, peer review helps.
Good luck with awakening of entire societies to anything. We will always have our flat-earthers with us, whether they drink tea or some other flavor.
I expect "angry feminists" would take issue with "serving." :-)
Anyway, all this seems a bit of a tangent. I really liked the book, thought it had a lot to say and hope it finds a very wide readership.
I hope you come back onto Goodreads and put up some reviews of your own. I look forward to more lively discussion.
Will, Great review! Thanks for the links - very interesting NYT review and I had seen internet discussion about the tshirts in the second link, but thank heavens, I don't think our girls have seen them (at least I hope not!) Thanks, too, for the book references in this commentary. Not sure if I'll read them all, but I will certainly take a look at them.
So glad you reposted this review, Will. I was not aware of this book previous, but will read it as soon as I get my hands on it.
Pretty thought provoking, Will. In fact, I had to post the link to your review to my FB page (1st time I ever posted someone else review). I have boys, so I have a whole different set of issues. To be honest I have loathed the whole "princess" thing for as long as I can remember, but I was a tomboy, I preferred to climb trees and chase my brother with snakes & worms :)
There is no greater honor here. Thanks. Teresa. I do hope you can still scare your brother and climb trees.
Will: A coincidence but was having discussion with adult daughter this week regarding same “princess” and/or “pink” subject which by the way, I have recognized and hated for years. I've called it Disney's “pink princesses.” Beth was saying young woman at counter close enough to touch, would not acknowledge her/their presence. She was standing there playing with stapler. I asked was she very pretty? Yes. My comment was her parents probably raised her as a “pink princess.” Some parents, unfortunately, raise their daughters to believe they are princesses, can get through life with their ‘beauty’ and being ‘special’.
Sad, really sad. Glad you and yours had the good sense to recognize that girls are not 'pink princesses' as I've always called them. Pathetic, those parents, and are doing an injustice to their daughters.
And to add to confusion, a new doll out that breast feeds. I’m sure she’s dressed in pink.
Great review and will get book. Sure it will be enlightening/eye-opening read.
Or, I can just send her your review which I'm sure covered all bases of the book.
Glad I happened upon your review...excellent! You did women (and men) a service by reading, reviewing and recommending it. Unfortunately, parents who should read it are probably too busy preparing their beautiful daughters for the beauty pageant which cost a $200 entry fee plus other related costs. Toddlers and Tiaras is a hit, you know.
Really great review Will. My wife and daughter for whatever reason, maybe a rejection of all that means, refuse to wear pink.
Jeff:Good for them! Tell them Cathy said 'congratulations.'
See, I told you what a great review Will wrote. Convinced me I had to read it myself.
So proud to know there are men who can see the damage such marketing can do to hold young women from reaching their highest potential.
As a mom of 4 daughters (2 of whom are now in college, one imminent to leave the nest), I am happy/relieved/proud that none of them were sucked into this sub-culture which defines girls and women in ways which only serve to frustrate me.They are all happily their own selves without having to buy into whatever is popular or marketed at the moment. And they find history far more interesting than who wore what at whatever red carpet event.
I've not read this book but I applaud the author's efforts to get the word out there.
Will: I just posted link to Time article this week. Disney World is updating Fantasy World, Beauty and the Beast, Belle, and more and will include something for the little lads. This is the second generation of the 'pink princess', I think. Started in 1980 thereabouts, right?
Great review Will. I'm glad I grew up long before this but sorry my nieces and nephews and now grand nieces and nephews are being so over exposed to it. I'll try to check this out.
Cathy, I am crushed, crushed that I will not be adding a Disney stop to my southern adventure. Thanks Sue. The book is definitely consciousness-raising.
Will:Ahhhh, only because the revamp is not completed for the little lads, I'm sure. And what a disappointment to your sweet wife. Crushed is right!
Been to DW so many times, can't count but most, if not all, when the kids were little. Thank goodness Beth never 'got' into the princess theme but that was before the onslaught of marketing. Good thing anyway because I couldn't have afforded it.
Let capitalism reign as it will. Nothing replaces good parenting. My daughter was pink for a bit...but now refuses to wear the color. We've increased saturation, she's now RED. A move I wholly support given the role model.
Harry wrote: "Let capitalism reign as it will. Nothing replaces good parenting. My daughter was pink for a bit...but now refuses to wear the color. We've increased saturation, she's now RED. A move I wholly ..."Agree, agree, agree! Good parenting should always be at the forefront and just saying "no, dear" with clear explanation is a good part of it.
Love the red, comment. Sounds like you guys did a terrific job, so congrats are in order!
Great review and interesting links as always. (I preferred your review to the one at the NY Times.) I don't have a daughter, and I can't remember being obsessed with anything except horses. (My mother as a child was notorious for decapitating any doll that came near her.) My sister is equally down-to-earth. Yet the moment her daughter (my niece) could walk and talk she demanded pink fluffy tutus, sparkly tiaras and suchlike.
I would imagine that young children are incredibly susceptible to the media & advertising aimed at them - then there is the whole peer pressure thing too....
At the end of the day though my niece grew up to be a fine and intelligent young woman, with very much her own mind. Hopefully for a lot of girls the pinkness is just a phase.
They are...Caroline, that is they are better, in my estimation than the NYT reviews. Will writes amazing reviews, many times better than the book and others share my opinion. He's very clever and witty, too. Makes his reviews very readable. The time and effort he puts into his reviews shows.
Will:Just noticed you put a link to my review. Thank you, that was thoughtful but what...you're such a nice fellow.
Your review was the reason I read the book so I readily agreed with Caroline's comments. Take a bow, friend!
Ok, fine whatever. here goes...oh, my back...damn...#$%##@...help me stand up...I can't bend...See? That's what happens. The nuns taught me well.
Even my "who's your favorite princess" daughter has broadened her range. I don't think this is an all or nothing proposition. But pushing girls to be less than they can be, even if it dampens a small percent of human possibility, seems a negative force to me. There will always be those who are more susceptible than others and more, hopefully, for whom, as Caroline points out, pink passes. And how much am I making that check out for, Cathy?
Let no one construe any of the above, review or commentary, to lead anyone to think that the artist known as Pink is not simply kick-ass great.
pushing girls to be less than they can be, even if it dampens a small percent of human possibility, seems a negative force to me You are pretty kick-ass great too, Will.
Oh god, Suzanne. My cheeks are turning....that color. Heeeeeeeeelllllllpppppp meeeeeeeeeee!I am nudging my kids to get me her new CD for Christmas.
You are so funny. My best laugh of the day. (Of course, today's project - writing a grant for diabetes treatment programs - does not involve a lot of hilarity, but still . . . ) A welcome comic relief. Hope you get everything you want for Christmas.
Will wrote: "Ok, fine whatever. here goes...oh, my back...damn...#$%##@...help me stand up...I can't bend...See? That's what happens. The nuns taught me well."To bend over? Oh, my, just what are you implying about the nuns, Will?
Notice that I'm not the only one who thinks you're pretty damn fine! Writer, reviewer, comedian; all of the above. And the check can be made out to cash, thank you very much. And be sure to include the exchange rate for Euros.
Oh, my, just what are you implying about the nuns, Will?The value of self-denigration and guilt. The bending over thing would be the priests. I was an altar boy for a brief time.
The check is in the mail, I swear.
Hope you get everything you want for Christmas.Thanks. If that's the case there will be a lot fewer Republicans on December 26.
Will - I haven't stalked your reviews in a long time. So I'm catching up on the books you've read and what you recommend. As always - very good and insightful! Although - I could use a few pounds. Cheers my goodreads friend.
I could use a few poundsPerhaps you would like some of mine. A few strays seem to have taken up residence under my belt.
Will wrote: "Oh, my, just what are you implying about the nuns, Will?The value of self-denigration and guilt. The bending over thing would be the priests. I was an altar boy for a brief time.
The check is in ..."
No altar boy for me, wouldn't let me. I was wrong sex but maybe I lucked out though in retrospect. Waiting for check! I'll need it.
Just to be clear, yes I was an altar boy, but no, I never experienced any sort of inappropriate sexual conduct from a cleric. Just being snarky. I know I sent that check out. Hmmm
Great review, and interesting ideas. My 2 pence plus inflation: my mom tried really hard to make me a girly-girl. She wanted me to wear dresses and fix my hair (but not wear makeup, at first - that changed as I went to high school) and play with dolls. I wanted to wear jeans and T-shirts, play in the dirt with trucks and animals (cats and dogs and chickens and horses and frogs and toads and other slimy things). For some reason, when I was about 8, I decided that popularity was overrated, and that I had absolutely no desire to learn to cheer-lead with my other friends, and went off to play on the swings and monkey bars with the guys. A person CAN break out of the role being designed for them, they just have to be strong enough in their own mind to not care that they don't fit in. I think people like me are sort of few and far between, though - most people seem to care a great deal about fitting in. I truly wish I knew why I feel the way I do, how exactly I figured it all out so young, so I could help teach others, but all I can do is encourage others to follow their joy rather than the crowd.I think I'll be checking this book out.
Katy:How refreshing to hear! Good for you. You make the real women of the world (America, anyway) rejoice. Wish there were more independent thinking women (and young girls) with your backbone to buck the efforts to make money via marketing. Read the book; it's a fun, eyeopening read and worth the time and effort which isn't much (time, that is.) Congratulations to you and enjoyed reading your comments.
I read the book because of Will's great review and appreciated hearing from a man on the subject. Prior to his review never heard of the book. His reading is so varied and interesting and adds books to my already full book shelf. Will moves me to vary my reading habits and favprote genre which is much appreciated.
Cathy wrote: "Katy:How refreshing to hear! Good for you. You make the real women of the world (America, anyway) rejoice. Wish there were more independent thinking women (and young girls) with your backbone ..."
Thanks. It wasn't easy - I've gone through life with the stigma of being "weird", but fortunately I just didn't care. *shrug* I truly do wish that I could explain it so that others could understand - but I simply have no idea why I turned out this way.
I've added this book to my Amazon wishlist, where either someone will buy it for me, or I'll pick it up next time I have a gift certificate.
What a great review, Will! Sounds like a fascinating subject.I'm glad I grew up before the pink explosion. I have 2 sons and no daughters but i vowed if i did have a girl she would be a book nerd and a hockey player.
It really is sad to see young girls conforming so much and afraid to be different from their peers. Girls can be such bullies and so mean!!
Will: Great update from the APA. Thanks for the link. Read it all but the executive summary really says most of it. Hope that those interested will read at least that and at the bottom, what we can do.
I stopped watching TLC (The Learning Channel, for god's sake!) in part because of Toddlers and Tiaras and the sexualization of those little girls. What a disgrace, those parents.
Wish the APA members who did the study had a man or two on their board. I think it would lend more credibility just as you, a man, reading and writing the review lends more to the subject.
It's not only a girl/woman issue, it's also a boy/man issue. Just taking the example of the Steubenville, Ohio rape of the young 16 year old drunk young woman by 16 and 17 year old young men. She was nothing but a sexual 'toy' for them. So sad.
Off my soap box...great job, Will, keeping up with this subject. My hat is off to you since I think it is so important that men enter this dialog. Take another "bow" my friend.
I added this one to my "to read" list. In all my roles, as a parent, grandparent, school counselor, school principal and school superintendent, I have always worried about the sexualization of our girls AND women. The great harm many societies, not just American, do to us, cannot be easily undone. It seems we all fall into the trap of purchasing the dolls, clothing them, watching the TV shows, etc. How do you fight it? I read The Hurried Child by David Elkind years ago and did my best not to rush my children to grow up--don't really know how I did.
Thanks for the update. I have a 'little girl' who's now 17, and am always interested in this articles/studies.
Vivian wrote: "I added this one to my "to read" list. In all my roles, as a parent, grandparent, school counselor, school principal and school superintendent, I have always worried about the sexualization of our ..."I think in a way it is like placing a bet at the track. You put in what you put in, then all you can do is take your seat, or lean over the rail, and cheer for your
The author's name sounded vaguely familiar and I see now that I've read Schoolgirls: Young Women, Self Esteem, and the Confidence Gap for one of my classes.