Beauty Standards
Baby weight is bullshit
9I got the following press release yesterday and couldn’t resist sharing. You too could have a ‘yummy mummy tummy’ if you’re willing to forego all other activities and dedicate yourself singularly to achieving your pre-pregnancy shape or carving out a whole new shape for yourself altogether! Imagine that.
My comments are in brackets.
GET A ‘YUMMY MUMMY TUMMY’ IN THE COMFORT OF YOUR OWN HOME
Having a newborn to look after is a full time job, leaving most new mums little time to think about anything more than grabbing some extra sleep when the opportunity arises [But don't! That would be selfish. Instead, tone that mound of flesh on your abdomen before the flab swallows you whole and you become - *whisper* - FAT!]. Despite wanting to snap back into pre-pregnancy shape overnight, reality for most is something of an uphill struggle made harder by the lack of time and energy to get out and exercise; a vicious cycle which in turn can dampen spirits and leave new mums feeling even more sluggish and tired [Exacerbated by the fact that new mums don't even have time to pee alone, let alone work out for an hour].
Janey Holliday founder and Director of Fit For A Princess [not surprised in the least by this name] - outdoor and online fitness for women, is a committed mum of twins; Harry and Monty, 18 months [Did you hear that, lazy, non-committed mums of mere singletons? TWINS. And damn it, she's COMMITTED!] Within seven weeks of giving birth Janey had gone from a 58 to 28 inch waist [Um, wasn't most of that baby? I think everyone's waist measurements go down considerably after they've given birth] and was back in her pre-pregnancy jeans. Janey followed her own GUT BUSTER programme which is about eating the right foods, having a healthy gut and working on activating muscles and regaining strength. If women start doing sit-ups too soon, its not only dangerous but can actually make your muscles dome out [But obviously it was okay for Janey because she was back in tip-top shape a mere seven weeks later! I suppose by 'too soon' they mean while your perineum is still being stitched. But once you're on the recovery ward...it's crunch time!]
Within 13 weeks, she was back in her exercise gear teaching her daily bootcamps at the crack of dawn in the middle of Winter [With a live-in nanny this is super-simple to arrange]! This impressive transformation was not the result of some crazy fad diet or excessive exercise regime to shed the baby pounds in record time, but simply a measured approach to sensible eating and exercise, the philosophy upon which Janey founded Fit For A Princess.
“Getting up early cold be perceived as hell for a lot of new Mum’s, but by ensuring I went to bed when the twins did, having a coffee before I left the house and playing uplifting music in my car on the way to the sessions, meant I had more energy here than any other time of the day. For me, and the Mum’s doing the bootcamp it was actually ME time – no babies, no house to tidy, no business to run, just a group of women chatting and gossiping while we worked out – heaven!”, Janey comments. [Wait. Do you mean that by sacrificing the entirety of my evenings and time spent with my partner or others, I can go to bed at 8pm and be ready to wake up at 4am for a little ab-toning and a gossip with the girls before returning to start my day as baby-wrangler and housekeeper? Sweet!]
However, for some, in the first few weeks and months, getting outdoors to do a class and finding both the time and energy to exercise is not always a reality [And for some, that struggle continues until the child leaves home at 18+; the horror!]. From her experience as a new mum coping with the juggling act of looking after her twins and herself, Janey has developed over 200 minutes of outdoor video workouts which are broken into 15 different sections and a variety of cartoon illustrated fitness ebooks, allowing Mum’s to fit in some highly effective exercises that can be done in stolen moments throughout the day, from the comfort and privacy of your front room. The exercises are aimed not just at helping to shift excess baby weight and tone new mummy tummies [is there a more horrid, insipid phrase?], but to boost energy levels and confidence through the positive effects of exercise. Plus you don’t have to be an exercise guru to do them! [Indeed. You need only be committed to choosing exercise over sleep, adult interaction, hobbies, fostering relationships or having 'Me time' that doesn't involve sweat or pain]
If you live in London or near one of the Fit a Princess franchisees and are settled into a routine and finding more time to get out and about, a 2 week bootcamp is a great way to kick start a new healthy approach to exercising, even if you haven’t exercised for a while. These intensive courses run throughout the year at baby-friendly times and are specifically designed to maximise inch loss, shape change and fitness levels, as well as providing an incentive to get out the front door into the fresh air and meet new, like minded people.
Exercise doesn’t have to be a burden and getting back into shape after having a baby needn’t feel like an unattainable goal [But it does need to be a goal!]. With the right approach and guidance, and a little bit of motivation [Just buy a few women's glossies and you'll be hating yourself in record time], you’ll be amazed at how quickly you’ll feel the positive benefits of exercise for both you and your baby [and your man and society, natch].
The hypocrite in the room: Views on female sexuality
22
I wrote last month about the uproar caused by Primark’s padded bras for little girls and why I think the outrage was misplaced. I said:
Why would we expect a little girl, who so desperately wants to emulate the older girls and women around her (including the ones she sees on billboards, TV and music videos), to understand that aspiring to have the body and looks that she knows will be expected of her when she’s older is somehow wrong or shameful as a child? What is it about female beauty standards that we are so horrified when children copy them? Is it because we fear they will ‘grow up too soon’, or because we know that those beauty standards are harmful by nature, no matter one’s age?
and
The sexualisation of children is a problem, yes. But the chicken that laid this rancid egg is not paedophilia or evil retailers bent on making children grow up before their time — it’s the continuing sexualisation of women and the perpetuation of gender stereotypes. Without either of those, padded bras for little girls wouldn’t have even entered a retail executive’s head. At the way our culture stands, can you really blame Primark for simply maintaining the status quo?
And now we learn there is yet another zOmG The Children!! outrage, but this time it’s about some eight and nine-year-old girls performing a routine at an urban dance competition to Beyonce’s ‘Single Ladies’, complete with ‘sexy’ dance moves and skimpy, sparkly outfits. The video went viral a few days ago and has been circulating all over the United States of Paranoia America and beyond.* This is, of course, causing the world’s morality neurons to implode.
High priestess of judgmental parenting, Jessica Gottlieb, wrote about it here and let’s just say she did not approve. This is the same woman who thinks we should accept that breastfeeding and bringing children out in public are going to be frowned upon by a large segment of society and we should just learn to accept that and adjust our lives accordingly. So while I really don’t care what Ms. Gottlieb herself has to say about this particular controversy, the fact that so many people have jumped on the Oh My God What Little Sluts bandwagon has disturbed me. In fact, one dad wrote a blog post about it entitled Stop Slutting Up Our Girls [hey, did you know that 'slut' was now a verb as well --neat, eh?!], in which he notes:
I have a daughter. I see the way she is marketed to. I’ve taken her shopping and seen the outfits that hang on display. Most of it is fine, but so much of it is far from that. Sure, sex sells, but do we need to be selling it to girls so young that they haven’t even developed yet? There is no reason for that.
He also wrote
Parents, you are the last line of defense here. The old saying that sex sells is a fact and we all know it. That is never going to change, but does sex have to sell in your house? No, it doesn’t. This is a problem that parents are allowing to happen. Complain all you want about what is happening in our world, but the more active you are as a parent and not allow things like this to happen the better we all will be.
First, let’s get something out of the way. Whether you think ‘suggestive’ dancing and ‘sexy’ outfits are appropriate for children or not, the fact is that these things are both culturally-approved expressions of female sexuality (or sad demonstrations of deep-rooted patriarchal norms that centre the male gaze above true female sexual desires, depending on your view). Putting the onus on parents (i.e. mothers) to police their daughters’ actions, behaviours and dress to ensure they receive just enough social conditioning to be a ‘good’ and ‘normal’ female (pretty, thin, nice, deferential, morally upright, sexy but not too sexy, smart but not too smart) but being super careful to not let them cross the line into ‘bad’ or ‘abnormal’ female behaviours (not adhering to beauty and body standards, being a ‘bitch’, expressing sexuality in a way that could be construed as ‘slutty’, ’easy’ or, horror of horrors, queer, challenging authority, prioritising education or career over marriage and motherhood) is deeply problematic, not least because it is largely an exercise carried out on our daughters, not our sons, and the blame for a girl not ‘turning out well’ is often assigned to the mother, who is presumed to have undertaken the majority of childrearing. How often do we see or read about a child doing something ‘bad’ and someone’s immediate response is, “Where is that child’s mother?”
Of course, when it comes to policing female sexuality, fathers are, for once, actively encouraged to participate in parenting by being the monitor of skirt length, cleavage depth and worthiness of any male suitors that come a’knocking. A perceived breach of this fatherly ‘guarding’ of his daughter’s sexuality puts a man well within his rights to threaten said suitors with physical violence or intimidation, and his daughter under lock and key until she proves she can keep her legs shut. The idea that a girl or woman’s sexuality is ‘owned’ by her father until she ‘gives’ it to her chosen partner (who will then ‘take’ her virginity) reinforces the notion of Women As Property and their bodies the currency of power between men.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: We will never be rid of the sexualisation of girls until we are rid of the sexualisation of women. The problem is that we have become so immune to the harm that objectification has on women (who all start out as little girls) that we are blind to its roots. Notice how the dad from the ‘Slutting it Up’ article blithely notes (twice) that “sex sells,” indicating that this is an inevitable and acceptable argument for marketing women’s sexuality once they are deemed adult enough. Being okay with women’s bodies being used to please others and sell products but being abhorred by the same treatment of girls is not only ignorant but hypocritical. The argument that children are innocent and therefore need protecting from these kinds of messages and influence is completely sidelining the fact that children, regardless of how much we ‘protect’ them, are growing up seeing women’s bodies and beauty being admired above all else. They see their fathers and other men they respect buying the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue or ogling topless Page 3 girls. They see how much praise and acclaim women’s looks get them. They see half-naked women with makeup-caked, come-hither eyes on every billboard and on the front of every magazine cover they pass. They see videos like the one for Beyonce’s ‘Single Ladies’, one that won many awards and was highly praised by adults for being ‘sexy’ and ‘innovative’ and they know that when their time comes, they too will be rewarded and praised if they can look and move like the dancers on the screen. So when we get upset at the sexualisation of girls but embrace it wholeheartedly once those girls become women, is it any wonder that cultural influence wins out over individual parents’ attempts to discourage and minimise it?
If you’re not comfortable with seeing girl children copy these grown-up behaviours, don’t be so complicit in accepting the behaviours they were copying in the first place. If you’re a father and the thought of your little girl gyrating on a pole is too much to bear, don’t visit strip clubs when you’re out with the guys. If you’re a mother who invests heavily in adhering to beauty standards, don’t be surprised when your daughter won’t leave the house without eyeliner and lipstick and gets a boob job to ‘feel good about herself.’ If you’re disgusted by the thought of a 7-year-old wanting a padded bra, be disgusted at all the ads featuring women’s breasts.
Until we start respecting women, little girls will never respect themselves enough to make truly independent, autonomous choices that reflect their own dreams, desires and talents. Instead, they will move through life knowing the world is a voyeur and they must perform; that their sexuality is a product that must be consumed and devoured, until their beauty fades and their bellies sag, when the world will be finished with them. And when they become mothers themselves, they will start the cycle all over again, training their own daughters to run on the same hamster wheel that enslaves us all.
If you want to get off the wheel, stop complaining while you run to keep up. Instead, grab a hammer and help smash the damn thing apart.
*The video has been taken down now but clips of it can be viewed by clicking through here
Hat-tip to Kelly for suggesting I write about this
Emulating oppression
9
The media, most parents and just about everyone, really, have been in a tizz about the latest Child Sexualisation Horror, a padded bikini top for 7-year-olds being sold in Primark. Parents’ and children’s groups called for the bikinis to be removed, saying it sexualised young girls and made them targets for paedophilia.
While I don’t deny the former, I completely disagree with the latter assumption, that sexualisation leads to paedophilia. Linking the way a female (be it a young girl or adult woman) dresses with her susceptibility to sexual assault and violence is at best misguided and at worst incredibly harmful. Let’s get this straight once and for all: the clothes we wear do not make us into victims; only those who would abuse and assault us do that.
While it may be comforting to think that if we only dress and act in the ‘right’ way that we won’t become victims of abuse, it’s simply not true. The continued acceptance of this myth is not only incredibly harmful to women and girls but allows their assailants to justify, excuse and continue their crimes. While everyone is tutting at the girl in the short skirt or padded bra, a predator snatches his ‘modestly-dressed’ prey.
And as for whether Primark was wrong to sell the item in question, I’m not so sure that the answer is as simple as the resounding ‘Hell yes!’ coming from all quarters. Again, it seems nice and easy to blame the retailer for making these ‘offensive’ items but let’s dig a little deeper. Why would we expect a little girl, who so desperately wants to emulate the older girls and women around her (including the ones she sees on billboards, TV and music videos), to understand that aspiring to have the body and looks that she knows will be expected of her when she’s older is somehow wrong or shameful as a child? What is it about female beauty standards that we are so horrified when children copy them? Is it because we fear they will ‘grow up too soon’, or because we know that those beauty standards are harmful by nature, no matter one’s age?
While it is of course disturbing to think of girls as young as seven wanting to have large breasts or wear lots of make-up, is it really so different from the ways in which young boys emulate the stereotypically masculine behaviour around them? Just because the emphasis is less on their bodies and more on their behaviour doesn’t mean that this modelling is any less harmful. Boys of seven who want to copy those fathers who subscribe to macho standards will know that they are expected to like and play at rough or violent endeavours like war and sports, suppress their emotions, be physically strong and imposing and distance themselves from anything that could be construed as ‘girly’ or ‘gay’. Yet, we don’t seem to get too worked up when they are indoctrinated with these messages, many of which are harmful to their self-esteem and emotional growth, because we’ve deemed those sorts of behaviours as normal and inevitable. Teaching our boys to be emotionally distant and aggressive seems to be acceptable in our society but woe betide the little girl who wants to copy her mother or the ladies on TV. Talk about conflicting messages!
The sexualisation of children is a problem, yes. But the chicken that laid this rancid egg is not paedophilia or evil retailers bent on making children grow up before their time — it’s the continuing sexualisation of women and the perpetuation of gender stereotypes. Without either of those, padded bras for little girls wouldn’t have even entered a retail executive’s head. At the way our culture stands, can you really blame Primark for simply maintaining the status quo?