THE
PRINCESS REIGNS STILL, BUT FOR HOW LONG?
I heard of ‘Cinderella ate
my daughter’ by Peggy Orenstein from a friend, a mother of a ‘princess’. The
title caught my attention, although, being the mother of a non-princess, the
book wasn’t particularly relevant to me.
Sahana, my daughter watched
her share of Cinderella, Ariel, Belle, Snow White movies but when she was taken
to a toy store, she always gravitated towards motorized scooters, magic trick
boxes, spy kits and such like. From a very early age, given a choice, she chose
a book store over a toy store. She wore a Snow White Halloween costume to her
kindergarten Halloween party. I believe she did that to conform to the
collective consensus on princess costumes among her girlfriends in class, not
from her heart’s desire. First grade Halloween party saw her as a ghost with a
simple, home-made costume, the subsequent years were lady gansta, warrior Xena
and so on. Now in middle school, Halloween means an orange shirt and a swagger.
In the book, Orenstein
raises the question ‘how dangerous is pink and pretty anyway – especially given
girls’ success in the classroom and on the playing field?’ ‘Does playing
Cinderella shield girls from early sexualization – or prime them for it? Could
today’s princess become tomorrow’s sexting teen?’
Personally, I think it
boils down to what mom and dad are telling their daughters when they hand them
their princess dolls or buy that ultra-expensive Disney princess alarm clock
for their pink room. If the message to the child is clear that the princesses
and their lives are make-believe fairy tales and reiterate that playing in
make-believe world is ok as long as one is using one’s imagination. I haven’t
seen many women walking around in their Cinderella costume, or being affected
for life by the impact of helplessness portrayed by the Princess stories. It
would be wrong to blame the Princess doll, a child hood playmate, for the
insecurity or helplessness that certain girls grow up with. The root cause for
those afflictions go deeper. In the stories, Belle changes a beast to a Prince
with her kindness and love, Ariel sacrifices her voice for love. Maybe I am not
feminist enough to see these acts as a submission of a woman to get a man, but
as gestures of kindness and love for another human. That is how I interpreted
the story to my daughter. The fact that the girl feels the love and makes a
change is a positive, proactive move – for me. But I understand - my
interpretation of these stories is debatable. What I find annoying is the fact
that the damsels are being constantly rescued by a prince! It is always a man
saving a woman. I wish once in a while a woman would save a man – if not for
anything but to maintain that precarious balance in nature! But then again,
these stories were written long ago, when the fabric of our society was
different. The world was ruled by men. The world now is PREDOMINANTLY ruled by
men, the women are making their niche slowly yet steadily. There is a
difference.
Orenstein concurs with my
thought on page 16 where she says ‘I have never seen a study proving that
playing princess specifically damages girls’ self-esteem or dampens other
aspirations. And trust me, I have looked.’ She says that there is ample
evidence that the more mainstream media girls consume, the more importance they
place on being pretty and sexy. There is also ‘reams of studies to show that
teenage girls and college students who hold conventional beliefs about
femininity – especially those that emphasize beauty and pleasing behavior are
less ambitious and more likely to be depressed than their peers.’
She makes another
interesting point that was relevant to my life and my children. She wondered
which sex has greater freedom when it comes to choosing toys. Girls get to choose
sequin dresses, baby dolls or spy kit, both are acceptable. But a boy, due to
imposed masculinity, primarily by the dads and also by society, would rather
die than be caught with a tutu or a pink bicycle. One of Ryan’s preschool
friends came for a play date and teased Ryan for riding his sister’s hand me
down, pink scooter. After the friend left, Ryan refused to get on it – ever
again. I held my ground and refused to buy him a blue scooter because I didn’t
want him to give in to peer pressure over the gender differentiating colors. He
gave up riding scooters altogether and moved on to bicycles. He chose a blue
one, at age four.
My husband proudly wears
pink shirts saying ‘real men wear pink’ and points out the pink cleats worn by
professional football players (breast cancer awareness) when my son talks of
the color disdainfully. It was somewhat enlightening to read in Orenstein’s
book that according to Jo Paoletti, an associate professor of American studies
at the University of Maryland, children were not color coded at all until the
early twentieth century. Babies wore white before the advent of washing
machines, since the sure way of getting clothes clean was boiling them. In
fact, pink was considered more masculine since it was a watered down version of
red – a color depicting strength. Blue, on the other hand, was associated with
Virgin Mary, constancy and faithfulness and symbolized femininity. I was
curious if ‘real men wear pink’ idea emanated from that concept of red being
the color of strength.
She made a few other
interesting observations which I think are worthy of mention here. She made me
see the character of Bella Swan in the notorious …errr I meant famous Twilight
series. Like Orenstein, reading the book ‘makes me grind my teeth until my jaw
pops’, yet she made me see the heroine in a new light. What a contrast Bella
Swan is from the other heroines that main stream media churns out with perfect
skin, perfect teeth and perfect body for the teenage girls to emulate and fret
over. Bella Swan is a regular, run of the mill girl. She isn’t particularly
pretty, nor is she the sharpest tool in the shed. She is not the most exciting
girl in school yet the most enigmatic, handsome boy falls head over heels in
love with her. Orenstein says ‘Twilight lets a girl feel heat without needing
to look hot’. I may not turn up my nose in disgust at the mention of Bella Swan
from now on since she may have given girls what they needed – find their love
on their own terms.
The other issue that the
author raises, which I found interesting, is the separation of cultures which
results in an us-versus-them mentality between males and females. According to
experts, typically girls, around age two, move away from playing with boys who
are too rough and rowdy. Shortly after that, the boys follow suit, avoiding the
girls as much as they can. By the end of the first year of preschool, children
mostly play with other children of their same-sex. This segregation continues
till middle school when children start finding the opposite sex interesting but
for different reasons altogether. Studies show that same-sex play in childhood
MAY lead to less relating to the other sex and can cause hostile attitudes,
lack of empathy and lack of understanding, leading to increased rate of divorces
and domestic violence.
I was never interested in
dolls or make up, although I love the color pink, mainly because I look good in
it. I was considered ‘one of the guys’ growing up and I am still ‘one of the
guys’ among my friends. But I love to see a woman made up immaculately and
looking gorgeous. I just lament the fact that I lack the skill to put on makeup
tastefully. My daughter has followed my footsteps when it comes to make up and
pretty dresses. She buys comfortable shirts, sometimes from the boy’s section
in the department stores, she likes prints and designs that are labeled by
society as ‘boy’ prints. And she stays far, far away from anything pink/flowery
and paisley. Oh, and no glitter either, please. Orenstein writes, in her zeal
of steering her daughter away from pink and princess, she created a little girl
who looked disdainfully at her peers who actually liked to play with princess
dolls. It is difficult for a child to decipher her mother’s dislike for the
idea behind the princess stories rather than the color pink as such. Her
daughter had interpreted her aversion to the princess culture differently and
misdirected her disdain to the ‘girlie girls’. Sahana’s dislike for pink and
floral motif made me curious about how she felt about her friends who were into
pink and make up. I asked her if she looks down upon girls who make choices
which will be labeled girlie by many. She said “I don’t scorn make up and
girlie designs on my friends if they put it on and if it makes them feel good
about themselves. I don’t feel the need to put make up on my face. I do,
however, draw a line, when the desire to put make up becomes an obsession and
girls constantly whip out mirrors to check their mascaras. To me, that’s
annoying.”
The book was interesting,
well researched, well written. Did I agree with all she said? No, I didn’t. But
I was happy to read her perspective that she presented so well. Certain aspects
of the book were relevant to my life and my children, which I mentioned
earlier. I do, however, agree to everything she says in the last paragraph of
the book about preparing our daughters to thrive in this world:
‘…staying close but not
crowding them, standing firm in one’s values while remaining flexible. The path
to womanhood is strewn with enchantment, but it is also rife with thickets and
thorns and a Big Bad Culture that threatens to consume them even as they
consume it. The good news is, the choices we make for our
toddlers can influence how they navigate it as teens. I am not saying we can,
or will, do everything “right”, only that there -is power – magic – in
awareness. If we start with that, with wanting girls to see themselves from the
inside out rather than outside in, we will go a long way toward helping them
find their true happily-ever-afters.’
Not an easy task, teaching
our girls to see themselves from inside out, given the media frenzy environment
they are growing up in. But we have to try – what other choice do we have?
[PIYU DATTA]
0 Comments
