News Flash #3: "Why Do We Let Them Dress Like That?"

http://www.npr.org/2011/04/05/135146130/moms-to-kids-youre-not-going-out-wearing-that

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703899704576204580623018562.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

The Wall Street Journal published an article on March 19^th titled “Why Do We Let Them Dress Like That?” The title’s “them” refers to this American generation of teen and pre-teen girls…of course. The author, Jennifer Moses, has since been inundated with questions and follow up interviews from WSJ and NPR; the article itself has received over 650 comments (an unprecedented response that the Wall Street Journal has called a “tempest”). So, amongst all of the hotly debated issues, politics, and disasters that are published every day in the Journal, why is it that this topic struck such a nerve with readers? Why does the appearance of our female youth perpetually attract so much criticism? The opinions in this article provide a small window into our society’s view of women as liabilities and our projected need to look out for their best interest. Furthermore, by closely watching the reaction to this article, and how the greater media discusses this topic, we begin to better understand the complex nature of the social pressures on young women today.

A large portion of Moses’ article is spent justifying her complaint that young girls are simply dressing too scantily; and there are endless reasons why she thinks this is a dangerous problem. But I think that the value of the article (or rather, what has elicited the mass response) is in her answer to the question that the title asks. Why do we let them do it? The issue, Moses argues, is not with this generation of girls, but with this generation of parents – specifically, mothers. She says:

We are the first moms in history to have grown up with widely available birth control, the first who didn't have to worry about getting knocked up. We were also the first not only to be free of old-fashioned fears about our reputations but actually pressured by our peers and the wider culture to find our true womanhood in the bedroom.

It is helpful to recognize this distinction; personal histories and experiences are a large part of parenting, and changes in technology and society have certainly created a different background for this generation of moms. However, I think Moses’ statement fails to fully support the argument that follows it. She proposes that there are two main reasons that mothers have difficulty confronting their daughters about sexuality: (1) a fear of hypocrisy and (2) a vicarious thrill which mothers receive from having sexually attractive daughters (particularly as many mothers feel that they lose their own sex-appeal with age). I cannot imagine that these concerns are new, or even specific to this time and culture. American culture could not have gone from its puritan heritage to present day without this repeated cycle of a girl’s teen-aged rebellions affecting her mothering style down the road.

We should also be critical of how Moses’ allocates the responsibility to fix this “problem.” The article reads without any real consideration of the male role in this issue. The idea that boys or fathers are involved in any part of this is barely even hinted towards. In fact, the only time fathers are mentioned at all is in their assumed financial support of this style and behavior (which is also the only hint toward how consumerism may play a role). The absence of any male voice in these conversations and the lack of discussion about the male influence on female appearance show our society’s tendency to make problems concerning women just that. They are issues concerning only women, instead of issues that concern society. For example, in the NPR interview, Moses says, “clothing absolutely does send a message and if the messages is come grab my butt, I don't think we should be encouraging our youth to project that.” This shows how Moses’ perspective makes it the responsibility of the female to change her behavior in anticipation of the male’s reaction instead of the other way around. If attracting sexual misconduct is the concern, why not write the article about boys and title it, “Why Do We Let Them Act Like That?” Instead, Moses ignores the male role (and by doing so endorses it), leaving women with the burden of finding a solution to our violent sexual culture.

Female fashion trends clearly involve gender, and in order to understand it and why it makes so many people uncomfortable, we must look closely into how both males and females work to create these social norms and sexual politics. It is the same logic (in reverse) that Enloe employs when she examines nationalism alongside ideas of masculinity and femininity. It is impossible to fully understand the gender relations involving military men if we only look at the men; one must look deeper and consider how there might be a female influence, especially if the goal is to change it.

Except, in this case, one does not have to look very far to find the male influence on female fashion trends, which makes it even more disturbing that it is left out of this conversation. Moses’ article and the debates it has sparked offer a microcosm of the conflicting pressures on girls; they must both be attractive and reserved, desired and respected. Moses even acknowledges how this struggle extends to their mothers because, as parents, they want their daughter to be appealing but without the stigmas and dangers that may come along with that quality. And one cannot deny that these stigmas, desires, and dangers are stemming from more than the girls themselves. A vast majority of the demand for these styles is made in an attempt to please the male counterparts.

These sexual dynamics are what exist below the surface of Moses’ argument; implied in the tone of the article is the common myth that there is a direct and absolute correlation between displayed sexuality (in clothing choices) and acted sexuality. It is this assumption that creates such concern over clothing. If it was not a common belief that what you wear dictates how you act, I don’t think this article would have ever been written. At least, it would not have drawn so much attention.

In addition to questioning how this article reflects our culture, we must also explore how it contributes to it. Moses certainly has good intentions in writing this article. She wants to see confidence in young women without having them resort to self-objectification. But the way in which she presents this argument contributes to a larger form of patriarchy by steering the “blame” in a counter-productive direction. Instead of criticizing our society for promoting this behavior, this article criticizes mothers and daughters for being products of it. Perhaps Moses should instead be asking “Why Do We Make Them Dress Like That.” Overall, this article contributes to our society’s negative sexuality and adds to the pressures on women to reach an impossible standard. In order to create a more positive sexual culture, we need to stop blaming girls for their sexuality and start cultivating a positive environment that may encourage them to feel attractive and confident without having to express it in this way.