Such is the case in life, as well as literature.
“‘Tomboy’ was generally considered a positive label,” the authors of a study called “ Sissies, Mama’s Boys, and Tomboys” wrote, “as opposed to the ‘sissy’ who was described as having negative feminine traits.” Notice the inherent link between feminine and negative. Of course, femininity is even more reviled in boys.
Girlie girls, like the golden-ringleted Nellie Oleson in “Little House on the Prairie,” are often villains.
Tomboys, from Jo in Louisa May Alcott’s “Little Women” to Jo on Norman Lear’s 1980s sitcom “The Facts of Life,” are heroines. Consider the number of children’s books, films and TV shows in which tomboys are protagonists, while feminine boys and girls are problematic characters. While there is a proven and troubling connection between preferences for traditional femininity and girls’ low self-esteem, liberals’ hand-wringing over girlie girls could be an overcorrection, a backfired strain of third-wave feminism. A Texan pal of mine pointed out that a lipsticked 6-year-old would be told how adorable she looked in her hometown and perhaps offered a complementary set of high heels, while a masculine girl might be scorned.īut perhaps my culture of lefty liberals has a problem. Notions about masculinity and femininity are relative, of course, and rooted in culture. The answer is that we have internalized a kind of sexism that values masculinity in both boys and girls, just as it devalues femininity in them.
In fact, I had often been congratulated for facilitating her self-expression as a tomboy (her word) or a gender-nonconforming girl (the world’s words, and increasingly mine).īut this exchange made me wonder: Why are some of us so disapproving of feminine girls and so approving of masculine ones? I had allowed my older daughter to embrace the traditional trappings of masculinity, like baseball gloves and sweatpants. “You could not give it to her,” my friend said, matter-of-factly.
0 kommentar(er)
