girl power doing more harm than good
I was trying to figure out a better way to introduce this topic than I am having girl troubles. Not only is it unoriginal, but it also suggests that there are problems with my romantic life (there are, but that’s not important now). What I meant to do is say that the word “girl”, to me, is troubling. Of all the age signifiers available to us, “girl” is probably the most confusing and complicated of the bunch. Still, it has become a word so often used that it has taken on a wider and wider set of meanings. Just saying the word “girl” no longer holds any meaning on its own. Only through context can we ever be clear what the word refers to. This type of impreciseness can cause all kinds of problems.
What once meant a female child now has grown to include females ranging from newborn to approximately mid-thirties. With society insisting that we remain youthful throughout all stages of life, it makes sense that we would expand “girl” to include a broader age range of females. As our lifespans elongate the acceptable childhood range is expanding as well. Where one might have become a woman once based purely on biological standards (the age of adolescence signaling the start of womanhood), we have given up on letting nature bully us into terminology we don’t want. Now you can be a girl at pretty much any age so long as you or someone else calls you that, years lived, dignity and menopause be damned.
What I find so interesting about the acceptability of calling women girls is that it complicates the sexual attributes that are reserved for women. In a society where we consider child molesters among the worst members, it is baffling that it is more or less perfectly normal for actual girls (pre-adolescent females) to dress like “adults”, meaning wear clothes that are sexually suggestive and/or revealing. While we commit people who abuse children sexually (which is logical), we can’t help but make girls as sexually appealing as possible. The argument could be made that it is the individual who is responsible for interpreting the way a child is dressed and inferring that there is sexual connotation, but with products like Hannah Montana in the marketplace, I can’t help but question the intent of the creators of these types of female images. While it is up to an individual to act on particular impulses, there doesn’t seem to be as much thought about whether it’s appropriate or not to put these images out into the world. There has been some backlash, but the public seems much more willing to accept a scantily clad twelve year old than the man who is seduced by the images of that girl.
While there is one push from the cradle upwards for girls to be sexually mature, there is another from the grave down for women to act below their age. Both forces seem to be driving the essential image of the “girl” and “woman” to the magical age of eighteen, an age where legal adulthood has been reached, but the responsibilities of that milestone are still at least four years off. It is this age where women border on the peak of their desirability. What’s strange about eighteen is that biologically it is rather late to womanhood, considering most females reach child bearing age at least a couple of years before this. Stranger still is that while eighteen may be nearer the middle of reproductive fitness, it is starting to seem younger and younger in terms of social maturity. With people living considerably longer than previous generations, people reach the age of eighteen before a quarter of their life is up. Are we to believe that out of a potential eighty years, one has reached their full mental capabilities after only eighteen of them? Not only does maturity seem rushed, but then you have society encouraging childish behavior to continue well beyond what nature has deemed irresponsible, leading to the permanent infantilization of females.
I am convinced that America wants it this way. By fostering immaturity in women (and men as well), there is little threat that things will change. Without a fully functioning personality, women can be manipulated and controlled. They can call the men that take of them “daddy” whether that be her father or lover, and the man (who, let’s face it, is really a boy), can call her his girl. For whatever reason, we have become afraid of women. We admire the cuteness and sexual attractiveness of females, but when one uses traditional methods to achieve success, is responsible to her family (if one exists) and ventures into an area we are not comfortable with, we can’t handle it. That’s unfortunate because if a woman tries to use her sex appeal to gain some kind of advantage, we’re the first to call her out on it and act as if we’re appalled, when really what we’re thinking is, “Why didn’t she try to seduce me!”
Call me crazy, but I find mixed messages confusing. I’m not really sure how to deal with our existing gender inequalities, but I’m pretty sure perpetuating the use of the word “girl” to describe women isn’t a step in the right direction.
I also want to point out that during the writing of this essay I was listening to “That’s the Way Boys Are” on repeat.
What once meant a female child now has grown to include females ranging from newborn to approximately mid-thirties. With society insisting that we remain youthful throughout all stages of life, it makes sense that we would expand “girl” to include a broader age range of females. As our lifespans elongate the acceptable childhood range is expanding as well. Where one might have become a woman once based purely on biological standards (the age of adolescence signaling the start of womanhood), we have given up on letting nature bully us into terminology we don’t want. Now you can be a girl at pretty much any age so long as you or someone else calls you that, years lived, dignity and menopause be damned.
What I find so interesting about the acceptability of calling women girls is that it complicates the sexual attributes that are reserved for women. In a society where we consider child molesters among the worst members, it is baffling that it is more or less perfectly normal for actual girls (pre-adolescent females) to dress like “adults”, meaning wear clothes that are sexually suggestive and/or revealing. While we commit people who abuse children sexually (which is logical), we can’t help but make girls as sexually appealing as possible. The argument could be made that it is the individual who is responsible for interpreting the way a child is dressed and inferring that there is sexual connotation, but with products like Hannah Montana in the marketplace, I can’t help but question the intent of the creators of these types of female images. While it is up to an individual to act on particular impulses, there doesn’t seem to be as much thought about whether it’s appropriate or not to put these images out into the world. There has been some backlash, but the public seems much more willing to accept a scantily clad twelve year old than the man who is seduced by the images of that girl.
While there is one push from the cradle upwards for girls to be sexually mature, there is another from the grave down for women to act below their age. Both forces seem to be driving the essential image of the “girl” and “woman” to the magical age of eighteen, an age where legal adulthood has been reached, but the responsibilities of that milestone are still at least four years off. It is this age where women border on the peak of their desirability. What’s strange about eighteen is that biologically it is rather late to womanhood, considering most females reach child bearing age at least a couple of years before this. Stranger still is that while eighteen may be nearer the middle of reproductive fitness, it is starting to seem younger and younger in terms of social maturity. With people living considerably longer than previous generations, people reach the age of eighteen before a quarter of their life is up. Are we to believe that out of a potential eighty years, one has reached their full mental capabilities after only eighteen of them? Not only does maturity seem rushed, but then you have society encouraging childish behavior to continue well beyond what nature has deemed irresponsible, leading to the permanent infantilization of females.
I am convinced that America wants it this way. By fostering immaturity in women (and men as well), there is little threat that things will change. Without a fully functioning personality, women can be manipulated and controlled. They can call the men that take of them “daddy” whether that be her father or lover, and the man (who, let’s face it, is really a boy), can call her his girl. For whatever reason, we have become afraid of women. We admire the cuteness and sexual attractiveness of females, but when one uses traditional methods to achieve success, is responsible to her family (if one exists) and ventures into an area we are not comfortable with, we can’t handle it. That’s unfortunate because if a woman tries to use her sex appeal to gain some kind of advantage, we’re the first to call her out on it and act as if we’re appalled, when really what we’re thinking is, “Why didn’t she try to seduce me!”
Call me crazy, but I find mixed messages confusing. I’m not really sure how to deal with our existing gender inequalities, but I’m pretty sure perpetuating the use of the word “girl” to describe women isn’t a step in the right direction.
I also want to point out that during the writing of this essay I was listening to “That’s the Way Boys Are” on repeat.
Post a Comment →
Reader Comments