The hypocrite in the room: Views on female sexuality
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

Fantastic post, I agree whole-heartedly with your sentiments here, while it is deemed OK for women to be viewed as sexual objects, the child sexualisation thing is not going away. Thanks for a great post.
.-= Sharni´s last blog ..Ask The Cowboy =-.
[Reply]
Fertile Fem Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 9:04 PM
Yeah, I think we all kind of hoped that if we ignored the adult female sexuality exploitation thing it would just go away and not affect young girls but it obviously has and does, no bones about it.
[Reply]
I completely agree with your post. The root of the problem is the socially acceptable sexualisation of women – which is now spreading to young girls. Until we outlaw the idea that ‘sex sells’ we will not be able to stop this happening and to do that we have to stop the objectification of women’s bodies. Natasha Walter’s book Living Dolls really highlights what’s happening and makes frightening reading in my opinion.
.-= Jilly´s last blog ..Strange ideas =-.
[Reply]
Fertile Fem Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 9:05 PM
Yes, Walters’ book is good in exploring this very topic, though I am continually amazed that some people still fail to connect the dots and refuse to view it as anything but a result of slutty girls just being too slutty (oh, and permissive parenting).
[Reply]
I do not approve of the ads, images or sexualisation of women. I agree with what you are saying about it being a cycle that starts with women and naturally trickles down to our children. And in my area, it’s often the mothers that encourage it in their daughters.
However, I am unclear as to your feelings about that dad’s blog post. I have only read the excerpts that you posted. Do you disagree with what he’s saying? Or are you just taking it a step further and want us to focus on where much of this comes from? I get the impression that you don’t like what he is saying. Do you think he is wrong for saying that he will set some standards for his daughter and show her that she doesn’t need to look or act like all the junk that is being marketed to her (to all women)?
This is my first visit to your site and I’m not trying to argue with you or anything– just trying to get some clarification on your thoughts!
[Reply]
Fertile Fem Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 9:12 PM
I don’t disagree with the sentiment behind that dad’s post, just the mentality with which he approached it. He wants to protect his daughter and see her make wise choices…I get that. But by positioning the issue as one in which he can control her sexuality or protect her from the cultural messages with the sheer power of his parental devotion and diligence speaks to the (often misguided) belief of the middle class that sheltering children from harsh reality in their youth will make them immune to it later in life. It just doesn’t work that way. Culture and media and peers have a much bigger influence than any of us want to admit and I think that denying or minimising that can be dangerous.
[Reply]
I agree that the we need to stop with the objectification of women in order to stop this trickling down to our girls. So how many women are willing to dress more modestly, ditch the cleavage, the short shorts, the tank tops that you can see through or the bra straps that show? How many women are willing to give up the super tight pants that are so low cut that you see their backward “smile” when they sit down? How many women are willing to dress as women who have confidence in their own femininity and intelligence enough to be modest? We have taught our women that being a feminist means being “in your face” with dress and language that taunt men and take all society down to a lower level. The idea that we as women who are feminist in ideology need to take on the attributes that we so abhor in men has been the downfall of true feminism. We need to get beyond the notion that we must act like men in order to stand beside them in the workplace or corporate world.
.-= Sheryl´s last blog ..Two WIP’s =-.
[Reply]
Fertile Fem Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 9:24 PM
From your comment, it seems you expect women to be the moral arbiters, with the onus on us to be ‘modest’ and not ‘take society down to a lower level.’ While I agree that we needn’t adopt the less-desirable, stereotypically male attributes in order to succeed or be respected, I disagree that it is solely our responsibility to dress or act in accordance with what has traditionally been viewed as appropriate feminine behaviour.
[Reply]
Oh, I get it. You don’t post any one who disagrees with you even when it is done in a civil and expressive way.
I guess that explains why there are only 2 comments on here.
[Reply]
Fertile Fem Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 9:25 PM
Sorry, I’m not sure what you’re on about. I’ve not had a comment from you at all, I’ve checked my moderation queue and spam filter and have found nothing. If you’d like to try to post your comment again I will be sure to approve it in a timely manner, so long as it meets my comment policy.
[Reply]
I agree with others’ sentiments here that as long as women are objectified little girls will suffer the consequences. However, as far as dads go… My father would have put a beating on any guy that mistreated me or any person that objectified my sexuality and it was not because he owned me. I was never his property. He LOVED me! A deep, pure love that sought to protect a developing daughter that perhaps was not yet totally equipped to make wise decisions regarding her own sexuality. I felt cherished, and valuable, and worthy of something so much more than a relationship that valued only my breasts or other “assets”. It gave me confidence and molded me into the fierce, independent, confident thirty-year-old woman I am today. You know what my father’s love never imparted to me? A feeling of being nothing more than someone’s property, feelings of having nothing to offer beyond what my physical body could give. His love and protection sheltered me from relationships and influences where I might have become “property” until an age where I was able to make wise and considerate choices for myself, choices not influenced by my peers. Thank God for my dad! I would wish every little girl could be surrounded by the love I was given, protection that was needed because of the nature of my innocence, not because of the letters on my chromosomes.
[Reply]
Fertile Fem Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 9:32 PM
I’m glad that you had such a trusting, open relationship with your dad and that you felt he was guiding and protecting you. But I ask you this: would you feel the same about a mother who would openly threaten to ‘put a beating on’ any girl who dared exploit her precious son’s sexuality? Somehow, I don’t think a mother’s ‘protection’ of her son’s sexuality would find as much acceptance as a father’s of his daughter’s. Can you explain why, in your opinion, this discrepancy exists? If it’s truly done out of a sense of parental love and protection, surely mothers would be perfectly within their rights to openly object to their sons going on dates or doing any assortment of activities done soley for the purpose of gaining female attention, including wearing trendy clothing, attempting to build muscle mass or be successful at sports, etc.. Or is that different somehow?
[Reply]
MuseOddity Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 10:42 PM
First off, I used the term “put a beating on” as a hyperbole and hope that you understand that my father would never actually threaten or ensue physical violence.
There are absolutely double standards within our society, I do not support them and do my best to not practice them. Your guess is as good as mine as to why these double standards exist , I only try not to perpetuate them. I only addressed the father/daughter relationship in my comment in response to your post implying that a protective father is somehow exercising ownership over his daughter and that is simply not necessarily the case. But, as a mother of a toddler son I will certainly be protective of him out of the immense love I have for him (the same love my dad had for me). This will certainly carry over to the interaction he has with the opposite sex (or the same, if he so chooses). I am instilling the value even now (he is 21 months old) of self-worth. I would absolutely feel the same about a mother who is protective of her son’s sexuality. Mothers ARE “perfectly within their rights” to protect their sons, society not seeing it that way does not change the fact. Now, you lost me when you went on about trending clothing, etc… I fail to see the relevance of that to the topic at hand. Setting individual boundaries for children (clothing, allowing to date or not, personal appearances, etc…) is, of course, at the discretion of the parents. You have to be OK with however society is going to accept it, if you truly feel you are making decisions in the best interest of your child why does it matter what someone else thinks?
.-= MuseOddity´s last blog ..Alive =-.
[Reply]
It’s sad only four comments in response to this awesome essay we have Sheryl claiming the problem is with WOMEN and their supposedly “suggestive” clothing. (is a shirtless man “suggestive” and immodest? Yet a tank-top clad woman is?) I see your point Sheryl, I honestly do, and I used to even agree with it in parts. But I think you’re misguided to take a problem within the patriarchy and then – talk about how ALL WOMEN should do things differently. I suggest reading http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2010/04/04/what-is-slut-shaming/, a good read.
If a man has his shirt of and dances suggestively on a video, we don’t instantly get down his throat and call him a whore, etc, etc, blame him for exacerbating problems of sexual assault and Ruining America, etc etc.
Another example re: boys – war / gun play. Certainly someone could have an objection to the constant violence of gun video games and boys’ expressions of it (obviously some girls play violent play as well, but around this neighborhood we see it much more in the groups of boys). But somehow discussions on this subject of gun play being icky as it’s an imitation of KILLING SOMEONE (or many someones) never reach the frenzy that the subject of women and girls’ bodies do (and the women and girls’ agency in choosing what to dress and what to do with their bodies). So “boys will be boys”, yet girls apparently are “whores”. In the article I read about this Single Ladies dance competition, 12 comments in a mother called the little girls “whores”, “hoochies”, and “prosti-tots”.
The amount of clothes and expression of an individual are not the point and as long as we keep pointing to THE WOMEN (or in this case, the little girls and their parents) we are MISSING the point.
Thank you for writing this, fertilefeminist!
.-= Kelly´s last blog ..no one says it better than pee-wee =-.
[Reply]
Fertile Fem Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 9:34 PM
Great point about boys and gun play. It seems that boys copying male/aggressive behaviours causes a lot less hand-wringing than a sparkly tube top does. And exactly how many people does sexuality kill each year as opposed to violence? Yeah, the comparison is pretty embarrassingly paltry.
[Reply]
This is a very complex issue and although you and your reader/responders have touched on many of the salient points, the folks who commented negatively towards the video and the parents on NBC, have valid points as well. First, I agree with Marsha here that we don’t really get a sense of where you stand on the initial issue of the presentation of the dancers, the competition, the parents involved and all “consenting” adults that are part of the issue. As the son of a 60′s/70′ proto feminist and being between 2 sisters, I have had a rich and enlightening experience over the past 40+ years learning and observing our popular culture. I am now an academic with an 8 yr old daughter and have struggled with our cultural and hystoric past. This issue will never go away. However, it has evolved dramatically in the past 100 years from Seneca Falls through the 19th Amendment and the Third Wave feminism of the past 40+ years. It is up to all of us, fathers, mothers, sisters and brothers, to get this discussion out into the open and continue it in an honest and direct manner. Males have always objectified females and some always will. That doesn’t mean we have to continue to present it as a part of our culture without dissent and rejection of its roots and lessons. Many of our boys (on into manhood) are still taught that girls and women are there to be objects. They are taught that it is the girls/women’s responsibility to dress “appropriately” and to not “arouse” boys/men. This is at the heart of the problem. When we start teaching our male AND female children (into adulthood) that the female of the species is not an object and we as males have the responsibility to let them be who they want to be without the “male gaze”, then we can all move forward another step. At the same time, it is our commercial culture that rejects responsibility (“we give the public what it wants”) and promulgates objectification by perpetuating the stereotypes of objectification without impunity. We allow them to get off without demanding they question their own ethics as arbiters of the culture. People don’t buy the crap unless it is sold to them.
Lastly, the crux of the issue rests in how parents project their wants, desires and dreams upon their children and forget that they need to teach their kids about how this began, where it comes from, how to see it and how to deal with it as they grow. This includes the bombardment of images and fantasies that are thrust upon them in every form imaginable every day of their lives.
The most challenging element of this complex issue lies in the range of perspectives throughout the world regarding the rights of women and girls in every culture. I don’t want to begin speaking in depth of most of the organized religions of the world that objectify, oppress and degrade females as a core part of their dogma. That is a deeper, more contentious debate.
[Reply]
Fertile Fem Reply:
May 16th, 2010 at 9:42 PM
I didn’t state my personal opinion on the dancers because that wasn’t the point of my post. My point is that no matter how visceral our reaction is to the sexualisation of girls, we need to apply it to women too. Getting outraged about girls doing the very things we approve or turn a blind eye to when it comes to adult women is harmful because as much as we’d like to pretend that there is one set of rules for girls and another for women, the fact is that all girls become women eventually and they will have been witness to, if not fully acquainted with, the expectations placed upon them from an early age. Teling girls not to be sexy or sexual but then bombarding them with messages telling that that sexy is good, sexy is great, sexy is something women should strive to be is hypocritical.
[Reply]
Aaaargh, this whole thing is so darn obvious, why doesn’t everyone get it?
Little girls will copy their mothers’ behaviour (and other role models’ behaviour) because that’s what they do. That is how they grow up. So they will play house, play dollies, dress up, want to put on make-up, and yes, dance sexily, if that is what they have seen grown-up women do.
If we don’t want girls to think this is what being a grown-up woman is about, then we need to stop women thinking that this is what being a grown-up woman is about. And men too, though I think women might be the tougher nut to crack, since so many of us have that self-destructive needing-to-please-a-man thing going on in us.
You put it so well. I love this website.
.-= Iota´s last blog ..Conundrums: part 1 =-.
[Reply]
I tried to reply to your reply to my comment but kept getting a blank page so here’s my response. Yes, we as women AND men should work together to change the mindset regarding women and their objectification. Let me ask in all sincerity though, what would happen if women just refused to pose for nude/porn photos and movies and changed their dress? Can you honestly say that it’s fair to expect all men to treat us with respect if we don’t dress respectfully? Why do women dress sexy? The word “sexy” says it all. To attract attention, and appeal to a man’s carnal nature. They are sending out the message that they are available. I like what Iota says in her comment about women and their “self-destructive needing-to-please-a-man thing going on in us”. That’s not the sort of attention I want from anyone other than my husband. I like what Iota says in her comment about women and their “self-destructive needing-to-please-a-man thing going on in us”. I dress modestly not only out of respect for myself, but him as well. He doesn’t “own” me, we are partners. He says constantly that I have been a bigger influence on him than anyone he knows for the good. He has a doctoral degree from Berkeley and I have a high school education, yet I am confident enough in my ability and am comfortable enough with who I am to not need the extra attention. I realize that some women dress scantily because they say it’s more comfortable, but really most of them should take a hard look in the mirror before heading out the door.
So while men do play an important part in keeping the standards higher, we as women are setting the standard over all more than anyone else. Thank you for the opportunity to share my views.
.-= Sheryl´s last blog ..Two WIP’s =-.
[Reply]
Great post – you’re totally right, we need to smash that wheel into little pieces and we need to address the fundamental issue as to how women are seen, not to police our children trying to, naturally through play, mimic the adult behaviour they see around them
.-= Muddling Along Mummy´s last blog ..Desert Island Questions & some lovely new blogs =-.
[Reply]
[...] Because we all want our tiny daughters to aspire to be a rich bloke’s f*ck-puppy. *Note: these children’s padded bikinis were removed from the shelves before you could say ‘Mail reader’. Apparently simply [...]
[...] The hypocrite in the room: Views on female sexuality posted at fertilefeminism.com. [...]