Tuesday, July 3, 2012

"Pink Think" and "From Badness to Meanness" reaction

Reading over the “Pink Think” introduction and “From Badness to Meanness,” I had a few comments and questions that relate to the subject of this course.

I hadn’t realized that “Pink Think” is a relatively recent cultural phenomenon, although the True Womanhood ideal is centuries old. It seems interesting that the ultra-feminization of women and girls developed in the 1940s and continued through the 1970s -- I got the impression that it was partially in response to women’s growing independence -- subtle (or not so subtle) reminders to women that they belonged at home, not in a college classroom or working at a traditionally male occupation.

Another observation I made about the Pink Think ideal is that so much of it seems centered on getting / keeping a man. The decorum guides that gave women such inane advice as “Never upstage a man. Don’t top his joke even if you have to bite your to keep from doing it” would be laughable if they were so sad. It seems that Pink Think teaches women that they can only define themselves in terms of a man. Why be delicate, soft, gentle? Not so much because of any intrinsic value, but because you will not be seen as a threat to the men / potential men in your life! I have seen this a lot in my girlfriends -- smart, talented women who move desultorily through life from one abusive / dysfunctional relationship to another -- sacrificing their own welfare and happiness because they cannot stand to be without a man to define them. Although this behavior certainly has psychological roots, I often wonder how much society plays a part -- because these women have been told since young girls (thanks, Disney) that a man (and only a man) will make them complete.

The third observation I made links the two articles, and raises the question: How much of Pink Think culture teaches girls how to be WHITE girls? I would have to do more research to really form any opinions, but it’s clear that white is the ideal. The example of the 1959 “Guide to Good Grooming for Negro Girls” illustrates this point.

Why is any of this important? Well … the way that we teach girls how to view themselves, and how to view themselves within the world, impacts them for the rest of their lives. The attitudes we instill in them illustrate the way we expect women to behave -- it’s much easier to indoctrinate children than adults. Based on my own observations, I think the greatest threat of Pink Think is that it instills in so many girls the pernicious idea that “You are not a whole human being until defined by a man.” As far as I know, men are never taught to define themselves in terms of their relationships with women. (Maybe, to a degree, they define themselves based on sexual encounters with women, but I don’t think it’s comparable.)

Let me close by saying that growing up, I was fiercely independent, and always did my own thing. I wasn’t a tomboy, but I certainly didn’t ascribe to Pink Think, either. However, as an adult, I am starting to wonder if all the Pink Think bombardments affected me in a way I wasn’t aware of. Something to consider …

7 comments:

  1. I agree with you, and I to believe "Pink Think" is also known as "How to be defined by a man."

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think your right. As far as I know men aren't really defined by their relationships with women. But women are. I never noticed that the cultural stigma surrounding the "spinster" is still alive and well in 2012. Unmarried, no children equates undesirable. The assumption is that as a woman you have failed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly!! Even today, I think women who remain unmarried into their 30s and 40s are looked upon as different, or eccentric, or even psychologically maladapted.

      Delete
    2. [I can't figure out how to edit a comment without deleting it ... oops.]

      Delete
  4. The problem of white girlhood as the ideal is part of the reason we saw feminism move into the third wave. When the second wave of feminism (1960s-1980s) focused on equality they were seeking equality among men and women, not among different races and ages and socioeconomic classes. I think feminism, and I hope the lens we will use for this class, is less about gender and more about power and ways certain people are given access to it while others are denied it based on their body, their age, their race, their checkbooks, and other factors. It calls into question how we define ourselves and others and too often it is by an adherence or denial of cultural scripts for "doing" gender or identity.

    I also love what you had to say about the post-war movement that leads to hyper-sexualizing of women. Consider how troubling it must have been for society when once dependent, soft women found themselves working in factories. The only way to "restore order" must have felt like a societal push to lay out rules for "what constitutes proper female behavior” (p. 7). I keep wondering what those rules look like now, 60 years later.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I recently learned that alternative genders were considered a "purple menace" to the women's right movement or feminists in the 60's. It was enough for me to want to disown the word feminism. But I would like any commentary as to my opinion that the word feminism is outdated and should be changed to some other word. It seems such a pejorative word these days.

    ReplyDelete