« 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/t/trackback/3702978

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

Michelle and Caroline,

It is true that many priests prefer to be called "Father first-name." This is the origin of the practice. Nevertheless, as many have become so accustomed, they become perplexed when they encounter a priest who prefers to use his surname. "But can't I call you Father Jim-Bob?"

What truly perplexes me is the small girl who calls me simply "priest" as in: "hello priest!" or "good morning priest!" It might well be time for mom and dad to explain to her that this is simply poor manners! The whole thing reminds me of that scene in the Scarlett and the Black where Mons. Flaherty and Christopher Plummer (Herr Commandant Hans?) are talking at the Colloseum and the Nazi becomes so upset (despondent would be the better word) as the priest walks away, the German calls after him, bellowing "Pri-i-e-est!"

Posted by: Fr. Totton at Nov 20, 2005 10:05:02 PM

The generational sequence described thusly by Rich: "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 . . ." is missing a generation. I was born in the mid-50s and my parents are from the Silent Generation, born between the mid-1920s and the mid-1940s. It's a generation often skipped by those who are anxious to blame all the ills of the 20th century on the supposedly dreadful Baby Boomers, but it contains a lot of the people who actually came up with the ideologies so abhorred by Boomer Haters.

Posted by: Susan Young at Nov 20, 2005 10:17:25 PM

I just emailed this article to my college aged daughter, after I saw some of "Live Journal" groups, and nearly died. While she was home, we were able to run a pretty tight ship. I only hope she remembers that now that she is in college.

Posted by: anonymous at Nov 20, 2005 11:42:55 PM

I had my 16 year old daughter read the article who by the way is not permitted to dress immodestly, or do alot of the things her friends are allowed to do. Her comment, "Mom, what's wrong with your generation? You're like the only one out of all of my friends parent's who knows how to say no." How do I do it? Well, I started saying no when they were young and they know I mean it and it's not because they were beaten because they weren't. They just know that I mean what I say. It amazes me when I see what people allow their kids to do. The other day my neighbor came to get her 10 year son to come home (he was playing with my children). I watched as he told her he wasn't ready and shut the door in her face. I quickly corrected him and told him he was not to speak to his mother like that, opened the door to find my neighbor smiling and saying, "please Sam, we really need to go." I thought she had lost her mind. He started a little tantrum and I took charge and told him to listen to his mother and go home now. My children, amazed at the whole scene laughingly said, Mrs. Smith sure lets Sam treat her differently than you do. I have to say I don't get it. Why are adults afraid of their children? And don't tell me about social services, etc... Today at Mass, I sat in front of a mother and father with 2 preschool aged children who talked the whole way through the liturgy including the consecration and were never told to be quiet by their parents. I hope this article wakes alot of people up.

Posted by: Mary at Nov 21, 2005 12:17:36 AM

I don't have any children, but I feel compelled to comment. When working and living in Tallahassee, I attended a Catholic church where a number of women dressed to show a lot of cleavage - it was more like they were going to a nightclub than to church. Despite printed admonitions in the weekly bulletin, this sort of vulgarity continued unabated. I don't think teenagers get their morally loose notions of dress entirely from their peers - their parents generation must take a lot of the blame.

Back home in Illinois, I was given some evidence that the younger generation sometimes is willing to call a halt to the excesses of their parents' generation. It was winter and the neighbor across the street had made a snowman which was obscenely and flagrantly and very luridly MALE. A few days later, it was obvious that the snowman had been modified to be more like a traditional snowman. I spoke to the 10-year old boy whose father had made the porno-snowman. "Ummm, uh, Nick, the snowman looks ... uh ... different. Why is that ?", I said. Young Nick said, "I was disgusted with the way my dad had made the snowman. So, I changed it." Maybe there is hope.

Posted by: Ed at Nov 21, 2005 12:37:53 AM

When your daughter's friends call her "goody two shoes" or saint so and so, then you know you've done a pretty good job, and all the effort you put into being a real parent has paid off. You know you've done an excellent job when your daughter doesn't mind being called that.

Posted by: R.L. at Nov 21, 2005 12:41:32 AM

It's fine if a priest wants to be called "Fr. Jones," but then he shouldn't call his parishoners "Bob" and "Mary." If he wants to be addressed by his last name, then he should address others that way too. The fact that a priest is my spiritual father doesn't mean he can treat me like a kid.

Posted by: Michael at Nov 21, 2005 8:39:41 AM

Addendum to the previous. The situation is sometimes complicated by large differences in age.

Posted by: Michael at Nov 21, 2005 8:50:50 AM

Just a note on the Father-first-name thing (parenthetical to this thread, I know). Historically, Religious order priests went by their first names, with the notion that, in entering into religious life, they were leaving the world and their family (they still retained their last names, of course). So, in common parlance, a religious order priest was addressed as Fr. Sophronius or Fr. Michael (following logically with Br. James or Br. Amadeus, and, the familiar Sr. Mary Catherine or Sr. St. John). Diocesan priests generally used their last names - in the same way Doctors and every other adult introduced themselves as Mr. Johnson, Fr. Smith, Dr. Strangelove or Bond, James Bond.
I think in the 60's a lot of diocesan priests started using their first names to be "cool" like the avant garde religious. now, of course, in a society where we have Dr. Phil and "Hi, my name is Joe", of course we're going to have more priests using, or feeling some pressure to use their first name.
I have to say I find it hard to introduce myself as "Mr. Ferguson" or even, "Ferguson, Tim Ferguson", generally going with simply, "Tim" Were I to be a priest (God spare the Church), I would probably introduce myself more often than not, "Fr. Tim", though I'd regret it each time.

Posted by: Tim Ferguson at Nov 21, 2005 9:03:07 AM

...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....

As it happens, Patricia Dalton is Catholic.

Posted by: Tom at Nov 21, 2005 9:08:21 AM

This Sunday at Mass a 14-15 year old was wearing jeans, very tight and low cut. She was with a parent and a sister. The sister a little younger was decently dressed. I blame our bishop for not giving moral guidance on issues like this. He is too busy going to meetings on finace and other things.

Posted by: John at Nov 21, 2005 9:51:37 AM

How about driving past the local girls Catholic HS and seeing a crowd of them waiting for the bus, looking like extras in a "Catholic Girls Gone Wild" video? I'm talking school skirts so short a slight breeze would show cheek bottoms. One had on white knee-hi's and bright red mary-janes; the only thing missing was the pole. Sure, they have to wear those three-button, collared white golf shirts, but they buy them four sizes too small so they can get some cleavage and belly showing.

So, what to do? One could call the school, announce you are a mother of daughters and would never, ever consider sending your girls there until they enforce a decent dress code. And then tell them that next time, you'll have your camera ready, will snap a shot and send copies to the principal, teachers and board members. And you will tell every mother in the community - especially the 8th graders who might consider going to their school - exactly what you saw.

One could do that.

Posted by: KH at Nov 21, 2005 10:07:46 AM

My youngest daughter attended a Catholic high school where the girls' skirts looked like postage stamps - way, way up there above the knees. Some would get out of the car, roll up the waistband and blouse the shirt down over the waistband. I have regretted and even confessed taking the easy way out and not insisting that she wear her skirt at a modest length.(When I confessed it , the priest said, "What about your husband?? Good question - she had 2 parents. ) Even so, we held the line in other areas. When she switched high schools and we got notices that she wasn't attending class we very calmly took her car keys away and said we'd be driving her and picking her up from school. She called a friend and said she was just going to chill at her house. We trusted the friend's parent and let her go. She was running away from home but we didn't know it at the time. She dropped out of school a few months before graduation and that was the beginning of years of heartbreak. Still we would do the same thing again because it was the right thing to do and despite her rebellion she respected us for it. God is good and she eventually got it all together and is now a wonderful Catholic wife and expectant mom and we have a good relationship. Some kids are compliant, some are rebellious, regardless, God holds parents accountable for how their daughters dress. And that's just one of the battles.

Posted by: Anonymous this time at Nov 21, 2005 10:26:57 AM

Being the mother of 3 daughters, now ages 15, 16 and 20, my advice to parents: BE PARENTS. We have told our girls: No, you can't wear bikinis, tight jeans or skirts, tops that show your cleavage or belly, short skirts, or t-shirts with inappropriate sayings. Because we homeschool, perhaps my girls are not subjected to as much peer pressure as those in traditional school settings. Yet they still squawked a bit, but once they knew we were not going to compromise, they accepted our guidelines. I have to admit, though, that I am a stricter mother than my mother was. Think about the 70's--I wore very short skirts, bikinis and some pretty low necklines, things I would never let my children wear. One daughter is now at Ave Maria, and there have been problems with some of the attire that some girls wear. The school does address the issue, and I hope they get even more stringent about it. One of their young priests, who is also head of the chastity club on campus, continues to explain to the students why they need modesty in their dress. Some of the kids have taken his words to heart, and have put away their revealing clothes.

Posted by: symona at Nov 21, 2005 10:35:46 AM

Priests as well as medical doctors need to address people the way they expect to be addressed. If he wants to be known as "Father Smith" or "Doctor Smith," he should address me as "Mr. Burke." PERIOD.

I had a fair and frank discussion with an M.D. once about this matter and he finally saw what I was getting at: I am not allowed to patronize people, and neither should he be. Same goes for priests.

Posted by: RP Burke at Nov 21, 2005 10:58:43 AM

First-name priests aren't the end of the world. After all, the apostles had no last names at all! However, I do think Fr. Last Name is preferable.

Posted by: James Kabala at Nov 21, 2005 11:13:43 AM

Also, I know I and some others like Sandra Miesel are fighting a losing battle here, but someone really needs to tell Frederica Matthewes-Green that the average northwestern European (or cultural descendant of a northwestern European, like an American) has not grown up in an extended-family household, nor (except a few aberrational periods like the 1950s) married in his or her teens since the FOURTEENTH CENTURY. If Matthewes-Green prefers extended-family households and teenage marriage, that's her prerogative and I'm willing to hear out her arguments, but she has to recognize that if the nuclear family and mid-twenties marriage leads inexorably to sexual decadence, northwest Europe should have gone sexually decadent around the time of the Battle of Agincourt. It seems she is determined to repeat this inaccurate argument in every religious-oriented or conservative magazine in America.

Posted by: James Kabala at Nov 21, 2005 11:25:14 AM

Or rather, if the "nuclear family and mid-twenties marriage LEAD inexorably..." Sorry for the bad subject-verb agreement.

Posted by: James Kabala at Nov 21, 2005 11:27:06 AM

The thing I've found is that the parents who run what they call a tight ship usually end up being the parents whose kids leave the house dressed from ankle to toe and shed as much clothing as they can as soon as they are out of their parents' sight. My daughter's friend, from a very strict Catholic family, does this all the time, and she often does it at my house, which puts me in a tough spot. By the time she finishes changing, she looks like she's about to do a stint at the Bunny Ranch.

I'm at a loss as to what to do. Her parents speak very little English and the mother barely speaks to anyone at all, preferring to let her husband do the talking, and he ends up getting abusive and offensive if one tries to speak to him about anything. The other problem is that I know he uses what I think is over-the-top corporal punishment with his kids and I fear I will put this girl in a harmful situation.

The truth is the clothes she's being told to wear are frumpy by Lands' End and LLBean standards, out of date, and far too old-lady-ish for a seventeen year old girl. Naturally, she's swinging too far in the other direction. She's much larger than my daughter, otherwise I'd give her a few of her things, or lend them for parties and such.

I think some kids have parents who go too far and are so strict they end up encouraging sneaking and lying. Then, when the kids do get away from the parents' sight and control, they go too far in the other direction. Some of the tops this girl (who is quite, ah, zaftig, shall we say) wears make her very vulnerable, I believe.

My daughter looks age-appropriate, fashionable, young, etc., but doesn't look matronly or like she got her clothes from the St. Vincent de Paul box (this family is not poor, so it's not as if the girl is indeed wearing cast-offs).

There's a balance here. Parents can let their kids be "with it" without the boys looking like derelicts or juvenile offenders and without the girls looking too sexy and trampish.

Posted by: Concerned at Nov 21, 2005 11:37:11 AM

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?

1. Start when they are babies. My wife has killed herself shopping for cute, conservative clothes.
2. Continue when they are teenagers. Dont give up.
3. Model for them.
4. Final answer. Use of force is not "loosing" you are fighting a war to save their souls. If they don't list you as cool parents that's ok. you'll have a lot of time in heaven to discuss this.

Posted by: Martin at Nov 21, 2005 11:37:57 AM

I meant to say my daughter looks fashionable, etc., not matronly, yet still decently covered.

Posted by: Concerned at Nov 21, 2005 11:39:48 AM

Although parents may be dressing their girls like frumpy old ladies, none of them live in S. Florida.

If kids do stuff behind their parents back that is on the kids' conscience, not the parents a point that should be made clear to the kids.

Posted by: Anonymous this time at Nov 21, 2005 12:41:38 PM

1) One thing common to every Perfect Utopian Future (TM) from the French Revolution to Star Trek's Federation (and all its fanboy knockoffs) as been Total Sexual Freedom (TM).

2) Don't worry too much, Ian & Lynn. Another generation or two of such Total Sexual Freedom (TM) and the problem will solve itself as America crumbles and falls to a civilization with a purpose other than getting laid. Such solution including the burqa, the locked harem, female circumcision, and mass executions of "harlots" by stoning (with small stones, so as not to kill too quickly).

Posted by: Ken at Nov 21, 2005 12:42:21 PM

What?

Posted by: Lynn at Nov 21, 2005 1:08:29 PM

"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?"

I was inspired a few years ago, when my oldest was about 11 and really started acting up. He gave me the CPS line and I told him that the next time he did such-and-such I was going to show up at school at dismissal time, bring along a megaphone and a big sign stating that I was his mother, and sing the barney song for all
his classmates. I assured him that it is physically impossible to die of embarassment and any calls to the authorities would just bring on more laughter. It solved his behavior problems.

Posted by: Catherine L at Nov 21, 2005 1:36:01 PM

Halloween costume sighted on a pre-teen in a putatively "conservative" part of my town: Paris Hilton, complete with chihuahua.

I was actually at a daily mass last week where a doddering old Nat'l Catholic Reporter-reading priest contributed to the problem of early sexualization. He opened up his homily into sort of a town meeting for the parishoners to exchange opinions on ordaining homosexual priests, when children were present! No circumlocutions or euphemisms, at all.

Posted by: Kevin Jones at Nov 21, 2005 2:19:48 PM

Appalling. I hope he got immediate feedback from those forced to listen. Perhaps someone should remind him that people go to Mass to pray, not to listen to his rantings.

Posted by: Lynn at Nov 21, 2005 2:26:56 PM

The clothing of some young women today never ceases to shock me. And I'm not that old either! When I was in high school in the early 90's, it didn't seem as bad. Maybe it's because I'm from a small town, but in my day, there was actually a certain amount of peer pressure to NOT dress too skimpily. I mean, if you dressed too provactively, you were considered "slutty" and got talked about quite a bit.

Yeah, a lot of my peers (and me too) rebelled in other ways (drinking, partying, etc.), but it didn't seem like parents cooperated with it so much, if it all. When we did bad things, we understood that they were wrong and that if our parents found out, we'd be in trouble.

Parents, even if they feel it's futile, need to set the rules and standards. Yeah, your kids might go off and do whatever anyway, but at least they will have a clear message of what behaviors you think are wrong.

My parents had a nice balance (setting limits, while not being super strict). I was angry with them a lot when I was a teenager, but now that I'm older, I really respect them and think that they were right about so many things.

I wonder if today's permissive parents are in for a rude awakening when their children get older.

Posted by: Sue T. at Nov 21, 2005 3:00:06 PM

As a woman, once a girl and a future mother, I hope this piece gets more coverage than the WP and blogs can provide.

The sad, but real, truth is that parents don't want to parent anymore and need to set rules - forcefully (but non-violently) if necessary. Monitoring how your child dresses is only a small, but important, part of being a parent.

Why is it so difficult to instill in young girls a sense of pride and prudence? Why can't we - as parents, fellow parish members, community participants - encourage them to think beyond Hollywood and TV and realize they - fully and appropriately clothed - are worth so much more than the Paris Hiltons and Britney Spearses of the world?

Posted by: Amy Pawlak at Nov 21, 2005 6:30:15 PM

"...By the time she finishes changing, she looks like she's about to do a stint at the Bunny Ranch. ... I'm at a loss as to what to do. ..." ~ (concerned)

If you have her respect, maybe you could use that as an opportunity to influence her in a positive way - for her good and the good of those she influences.

Posted by: Marla Davis at Nov 21, 2005 11:25:06 PM

"...By the time she finishes changing, she looks like she's about to do a stint at the Bunny Ranch. ... I'm at a loss as to what to do. ..." ~ (concerned)

Consider her a charity and use some of your tithe to take her (and your daughter, so the other girl won't feel picked on) out on a "girl's day" and buy her a few shirts that cover her prettily without being skintight nor translucent.

Posted by: Anonymous at Sep 8, 2006 4:41:56 PM

Post a comment