« Bush in China | Main | Walk the Line »

November 20, 2005

News Freakin' Flash

I am always glad to see pieces like this in the mainstream media, but I can't help but marvel at the sense of discovery and enlightenment contained therein and be absolutely sure that if say, I wrote the exact same piece with the exact same words and were identified at the end as, say, a "writer in the Catholic press," the objections would come fast and furious about puritanical moral codes and imposition of same.

Psychologist surveys the lives of young women today

Women once complained about being reduced to sex objects. Now, their daughters are volunteering to be sex objects. And while parents register disapproval, they often fail to take action. In that failure, they unwittingly place their daughters at risk by allowing them to bypass girlhood. When a daughter moves straight from little girl to woman, she's playing a role rather than gradually learning to live her own life. These girls may seem whole, but they aren't. There is often a lost girl inside.

Many who endorse provocative styles of dress have picked up on the liberal message of the '60s and taken it a step further. They see those who express distaste over the sexually explicit as hung up, old-fashioned. One young woman pointed out to me, "It's almost politically incorrect to say that something is inappropriate."

One of the most unsettling sights today is that of little girls dressed in teeny bikinis at the pool, or walking around in low-rise pants with midriff tops, or in heels and skimpy dresses, sometimes complete with makeup and jewelry. And this doesn't occur only at dance recitals. It can be everyday attire.

Have we come a long way, baby? The Lennon Sisters and Gidget of girlhoods gone by are light-years from today's Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan. The bridge between these two generations of stars was Madonna -- before she had children and cleaned up her act. Sometime over the past couple of decades, while we adults weren't looking, class went out and trash came in.

{snip}

Parents -- sometimes without even realizing it -- put their daughters at risk when they camouflage these features by allowing them to dress in adult ways. Such dress prompts the child to imitate adult female behavior that she doesn't understand. This can short-circuit normal development. It can also encourage older children and adults to relate to these young girls as sexual beings, sometimes with tragic consequences.

My younger sister told me a story about visiting the home of friends when the teenage daughter's date arrived. The daughter came downstairs in a T-shirt that read, "Strippers do it with poles." The parents seemed nonplussed; it was the boy who said to them, "You're letting her go out of the house in that ?"

Some parents are just misguided when it comes to monitoring their daughters' dress. I will be the first to admit that mental health experts have contributed to the problem. A good example is the school of thought once prevalent among psychologists that even young kids need to have a voice in all decisions that affect them -- with the corollary that, if they marshal a particularly good argument, they can often get what they want. Another approach is to give children two choices, rather than telling them what they have to do. But my personal favorite is the zany idea that parents should never say "No," because it would be too negative! It isn't surprising that they also have a tough time telling their daughters, "You're not going out of this house in that outfit. End of subject."

Another even bigger problem I see is indecision: Parents lack confidence in their instincts and in their judgment. Previous generations had no trouble making hard and fast rules. Parents in those days looked like and conducted themselves as adults and role models; kids and teenagers wanted to grow up and get the perks of adult life as soon as possible. Therapists see the inverse today. There are lots of parents who are uncomfortable with their grownup role and want to be young again; their kids don't want to grow up, or wish to postpone it as long as possible.

There are definitely cases I see in which girls imitate their mothers' sexy style of dress, with their mothers' blessing. (Although there was one high school girl who confided that she was glad she didn't have a mother who looked like Goldie Hawn -- too tough an act to follow!) But the majority of mothers want their daughters to dress more conservatively but are afraid to take their daughters on. Fathers, too.

They make the mistake of thinking that a good relationship is largely conflict-free. One mother said to me, "I hate to rock the boat when she's a teenager; we got along so well when she was little." They don't want a child who complains about them to her friends and the rest of the world on her blog.

I've polled a number of therapist colleagues, and virtually everyone agreed: We almost never see autocratic, dictatorial parents today; it is far more common to see parents who have relinquished power, and kids who have assumed it. Which makes for very unhappy young people. They are petulant and angry; they lack respect for their parents because their parents haven't inspired respect through real leadership.

Well, I'm just grateful it's in the Washington Post, and hope some parents pay attention.

Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451be0d69e200d8342d780353ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference News Freakin' Flash:

» Dressing With Dignity from Catholic Pillow Fight
Someone upstairs is looking out for me. It can't be a coincidence that I found a link to this article in the Washington Post on Amy Wellborn's blog titled News Freakin' Flash. [Read More]

Tracked on Nov 20, 2005 9:55:32 PM

Comments

"Well, I'm just grateful it's in the Washington Post, and hope some parents pay attention."

So do I; better late than never.
There are CYO leaders who have found it necessary to make dress codes which include: "no butt-cracks" and "no cleavage."


Posted by: Lynn at Nov 20, 2005 1:08:56 PM

The parents seemed nonplussed; it was the boy who said to them, "You're letting her go out of the house in that ?"

Ouch.

Posted by: Richard at Nov 20, 2005 1:27:29 PM

"For some reason, though, many adult women are failing to follow the instincts they've relied on for eons to protect themselves and their daughters. No longer are there common standards of dress and behavior -- which parents, schools and society used to work together to enforce."

I thought that part of the project of 'equality' was to do away with such paleolithic standards which were created to oppress women.

Posted by: Dave at Nov 20, 2005 1:46:49 PM

"Another even bigger problem I see is indecision: Parents lack confidence in their instincts and in their judgment. Previous generations had no trouble making hard and fast rules. Parents in those days looked like and conducted themselves as adults and role models; kids and teenagers wanted to grow up and get the perks of adult life as soon as possible. Therapists see the inverse today. There are lots of parents who are uncomfortable with their grownup role and want to be young again; their kids don't want to grow up, or wish to postpone it as long as possible."

This, I think, is the whole problem in a nutshell. That's why we have 30 year old women and men aborting their kids because they say "they're not ready yet" or "they're too young". Also, in general, society doesn't want us to look our age, particularly if we're women. My own mother-in-law told me that my sister's naturally gray hair looked "awful" and asked why she stopped dying it. Personally, I thought she looked great. I'd rather look like like her than some pathetic "cougar" who is doing everything she can to appeal to younger men and keep up with her teenage daughter. The clear lines between parent and child are blurred even further when children are encouraged to call adults and authority figures by their first names and when they are not required to take responsibility for their mistakes or bad behaviour. Many young people are led to believe there is no reason they should respect what adults tells them. Why would they listen to someone tell them how to dress?

Posted by: Michelle K. at Nov 20, 2005 2:22:01 PM

Amy,

How, may I ask, do you prevent your daughter from leaving the house dressed like a whore?

How do you stop your son from coming home after curfew?

How do you choose what your teenage children wear?

At some point, you come to the point where you have to address the subject of "force" and once you get there, you've lost, unless you're willing to be arrested by your court-saavy child's cell phone call to the police, claiming child abuse because you pulled her back from the front door.

They know the rules - they're taught them in school. You lose.

Posted by: Ian at Nov 20, 2005 2:25:15 PM

I think your view is a little pessimistic, Ian.

Posted by: Lynn at Nov 20, 2005 2:35:10 PM

Michelle K.,
I agree. Why do the seeming majority of Catholics instist on calling their priests "Fr. First-Name"?

Posted by: Troll at Nov 20, 2005 2:39:19 PM

Ian,

Well, for one thing, most teenage children do rely on their parents for money -- so cutting of the money flow can be an impediment to their getting inappropriate clothing!

Posted by: Mark Wyman at Nov 20, 2005 2:41:12 PM

Frederica Matthewes-Green, in a First Things essay entitled "Against Eternal Youth," wrote that the Peter Pan syndrome that seems to be playing a role in this has roots that go back fifty years.

The generation that survived the Great Depression and fought World War II resolved never to allow their kids to go through hardship like they experienced. And they made good on their promise, spoiling their Baby Boom children and normalizing narcissism and assertive self-actualization along the way.

Posted by: Rich Leonardi at Nov 20, 2005 3:47:34 PM

Many priests prefer to be called by their first names as long as the title Father is affixed. If a priest obviously prefers it that way, then to insist on calling him Father last name may offend him. Defer to what they wish. If in doubt. ask.

Posted by: Caroline at Nov 20, 2005 4:39:40 PM

Mark Wyman:

Many teenagers have jobs.

Posted by: Ian at Nov 20, 2005 4:47:42 PM

If things go the way they should, they never get to the point Ian describes.

But, sometimes they do get to that point, and at that point it is very difficult for parents to win. For instance, if your teenaged child is prescribed psychiatric medication and said child does not want to take it. A lawyer told me she has seen parents prosecuted for neglect for not making the child take the medication, and for abuse for holding the child and forcing the medication into his/her mouth.

Right now I have a child who usually doesn't chose to wear inappropriate clothes and who will defer to me if I insist that she wear a dress to church, or not go to church with bare arms etc.

But I have previously had children who would defer to me about nothing. I have some idea about how this came about in my family, but not sure if my conclusions can be generalized to others.

Susan Peterson

Posted by: Susan F. Peterson at Nov 20, 2005 5:35:47 PM

"Many teenagers have jobs."

Most teenagers -- at least in suburbia -- cannot hold a job without the cooperation of their parents, who must provide transportation.

Posted by: Marie at Nov 20, 2005 6:03:16 PM

Ian writes:How, may I ask, do you prevent your daughter from leaving the house dressed like a whore?

By not letting a whore's clothes in the house in the first place! And if they find their way in, by throwing them out in the trash, where they belong.

Posted by: Dmitri at Nov 20, 2005 6:11:14 PM

My two oldest daughters are a study in contras. At age 11, the older is very concerned about modesty and appropiateness. She always defers to me, no questions asked. The almost 10 yo on the other hand is much more "fashion-forward" shall we say, and is going to be a handful as she gets older. What do we do? Every stitch of clothing that goes on her body is approved by me and my husband. As she grows older as happens to have money to spend on clothes, believ me, it won't come in the house if it is not appropiate. She doesn't always like it and I know in her girlish way yearns to look "cool". But she also has been taught the value of modesty and purity and even surprised me the other day as she wondered aloud in what vocation she might grow the most in holiness when she grows up.
These are lessons learned from infancy and bound to fail if mom is worried that she is not looking as hip as the latest Hollywood starlet.

Posted by: Maria Ashwell at Nov 20, 2005 6:16:31 PM

Um, that should be contrasts...

Posted by: Maria Ashwell at Nov 20, 2005 6:17:16 PM

At some point, you come to the point where you have to address the subject of "force" and once you get there, you've lost, unless you're willing to be arrested by your court-saavy child's cell phone call to the police, claiming child abuse because you pulled her back from the front door.

When our daughters were, I believe 8 and 10, the older one told us once at the dinner table: "You can't do that, I'll call child protective services!"

I said: "Bring me the phone, I'll put it on speed-dial.".

That was the end of that discussion. Our children know that they have it better in our house than they would in foster care.

Ian, If you'd like to abdicate your authority as a parent, feel free. But don't be surprised when you raise a monster.

Posted by: Tony at Nov 20, 2005 6:52:58 PM

"At some point, you come to the point where you have to address the subject of "force" and once you get there, you've lost.."

The whole idea that abortion should be illegal is based on the premise that there are some things that society is willing to back up with force....for what, after all is the criminalization of an act but the decision that certain acts should be forceably restrained or punished.

You do your children no favor by leading them to believe that certain moral principles are not enforced by force....or coercion....or duress.

Be the adult. Your child will thank you for it.....someday.

Posted by: Jim at Nov 20, 2005 7:30:05 PM

As the father of a bright and lively soon to be teen-age daughter, I can state confidently that she will not be wearing harlot-for-hire clothes as long as she resides in this house. I think she will agree with her Mom and me since, thus far, she has been quite sensible in the clothes that she wishes to wear. However, if the hormone bath of the teen years warps her judgment we will enforce the proper standards until she recovers her equilibrium.

Might I also add that sleazy clothes on teen-age girls really don't make them look attractive to men but rather make them look cheap. Some men will always take advantage of a woman dressed like a tart, but no man will respect one.

Posted by: Donald R. McClarey at Nov 20, 2005 8:11:49 PM

"Ian, If you'd like to abdicate your authority as a parent, feel free. But don't be surprised when you raise a monster."

And don't be surprised when parents who haven't abdicated their own authority decide not to allow their children to hang around with your monsters.

Posted by: Marie at Nov 20, 2005 8:38:12 PM

Good article. But a small note from the "Word Detective" about nonplussed:


Dear Word Detective: I keep hearing the word "nonplussed" used to mean "not affected" or "unconcerned" in regard to an event that would usually be considered very shocking or upsetting, as in "John was nonplussed and merely smiled when the bat flew into the room." Isn't this usage almost exactly backwards? My dictionary defines "nonplussed" as meaning "utterly perplexed or stymied." Yet every time I've heard the word used lately it's been in the sense of "calm" or "cool as a cucumber." What's up with "nonplussed"? -- Edith Freedle, New York City.

Well, first of all, let me assure that I do, as the politicians say, feel your pain. I, too, have heard the usage of "nonplussed" to mean "unaffected," often, distressingly, on radio and TV news shows. And you are absolutely correct that this usage is just about precisely the opposite of the accepted meaning of "nonplussed," a meaning solidly rooted in the development of the word. Formed directly from the Latin phrase "non plus" (meaning "not more"), "nonplus" first appeared in English around 1582 as a noun meaning "a point at which no more can be done, a dead end." By 1606 we were using "nonplussed" to describe the state of being overwhelmed and exasperated by an event or circumstance that poses an insoluble dilemma or seems intolerable (i.e., "I can't take any more of this"). Therefore, if John were to be truly "nonplussed" when the bat entered the room, he would have to run around in circles waving his arms and shrieking like any normal person, not just sit there looking superior.

So the good news is that you are right, but the bad news is that you are only right for the time being. Like it or not (and believe me, I often don't), popular usage changes language, and the "cool as a cucumber" usage of "nonplussed" shows early signs of becoming the standard definition at some point not far in the future....

The girl's parents should have been nonplussed.
**********

To Caroline: I usually introduce myself as "Fr. Bloom" because some take "Fr. Phil" as an invitation to call me by my first name. On the other hand, I have never met an Hispanic who would take it upon himself to call me "Felipe."

Posted by: Fr. Phil Bloom at Nov 20, 2005 8:44:30 PM

I remember my first year as a Catholic school administrator and dealing with young women who were dressing immodestly for the first jeans day (fundraiser.) I learned quickly if the young lady is leaving the house dressing immodestly, call dad, because more often than not, mom thinks her daughter looks cool. There was also the case of a young woman who referred to her mother as the "sex machine," because that's what she was called at home. Again, dad seemed more upset about it than mom. Dealing with a dress code, especially for young women is not easy. Howevever, I can assure you that the majority of young women who dress responsibly just shake their head when it comes to parents who let their children leave the house looking like they belong in a freak show or strip club. I remember one young women who said, "why do some parents want to continue being teenagers instead of leaders." I think she summed it up best.

Posted by: Dave at Nov 20, 2005 8:50:55 PM

excellent article ... a lot to think about ...

Posted by: Becca at Nov 20, 2005 8:52:11 PM

I am an attorney who practices in juvenile court and can confirm that teens accusing their parents of abuse when the parents try to enforce rules of behavior is an unfortunate reality. Although I must say that most of the cases that I've encountered involve situations where the child's behavior has been out of control for some time and where the parent after a period of not taking action explodes and overreacts - usually with some violence. Although I also know of cases where teens have simply told protective services that their parent has physically abused them, when in fact it hasn't happened and the child later recants.

The advice regarding controlling what you can control is really well taken -- I've never seen parents brought to court for abuse for withholding car keys, disposing of inappropriate clothing, or withholding money -- but too often parents don't do these things because they don't want their child to be mad at them. Being a parent is tough, and requires leadership which will not always make you popular -- but someday your children will thank you for being a grownup.

Posted by: Trish at Nov 20, 2005 9:06:07 PM

Ian mentioned parents risking being ". . . arrested by your court-saavy child's cell phone call to the police, claiming child abuse because you pulled her back from the front door."

I think it was Dr. Laura who suggested the following approach in cases like this: one day the youngster comes home from school, and virtually all the stuff in her room is gone. She now has a bed, a pillow, a sheet, a blanket. She has a bureau, a mirror, a chair, a lamp, a brush, a comb, and a toothbrush, plus the supplies and equipment necessary for her to do her schoolwork

She has no TV, no phone, no ipod, no headphones or speakers on her computer, no CDs, no CD player, no make-up, no magazines, no souvenirs, no stuffed animals, no posters, no pictures.

Needless to say she is grounded. No car. No rides anywhere except to and from school, and to whatever school-related activities she is already committed to.

She rides the schoolbus, or she takes Mass Transit.

All her clothes and shoes except the simplest and plainest are gone.

She has three squares a day, a safe warm place to sleep at night, proper clothing and medical care, and her education is seen to, and that's it. Beyond that, her life as she knew it is O-V-E-R.

When she demands to know when she gets her stuff back, the parents tell her that when they decide that, they'll get back to her.

(It sounded so awful, I never forgot it.)

Posted by: Marion (Mael Muire) at Nov 20, 2005 10:01:40 PM

Post a comment