Whale Tails are Sooo Uncool

I brought up three daughters who are now 30,28 and 20. I had to listen to my two older daughters and their friends singing Madonna's "like a virgin for the very first time". I can not stand Madonna for this. When Madonna had children it was as if no one had had children on the planet before. All of a sudden Madonna became concerned about children.

Young women are under far more pressure to display their sexuality. Enough is Enough.

Being adventurous does not have to do with sex, it can have to do with education, travel and growing ones mind.

I think the return to modesty movement is healthy!

Sent by Kathleen | 2:15 PM | 8-23-2007

When the Gap promotes thongs for three year old girls we know our morals are in trouble.

Sent by kathleen | 2:17 PM | 8-23-2007

The modesty movement is an opportunity for girls and women to empower themselves to be different and resist the cultural pressures to be revealing and suggestive. Christa-Taylor.com is a great example of a clothing company, started by a 20-year-old, that values fashion and style in a way that preserves dignity. The founder, Christa Taylor, is working to restore the timeless decorum of Jackie Onassis and Audrey Hepburn -- fashion icons whose legacy was not soiled by the behavior that embroils today's pop women like Paris Hilton and Brittney Spears.

Sent by Michael Garvey | 2:18 PM | 8-23-2007

I can't believe how young girls are pushed to be sexy. All the clothing ads now say that you will be "sexy" if you buy the advertised clothes. I think a little modesty is a good thing no matter what age you are.

Sent by Martha Greene | 2:20 PM | 8-23-2007

A woman of 29 is not a "girl"

Sent by Steven Forbis | 2:22 PM | 8-23-2007

I think this is another example of the american movement towards correctness, the slippery slope that leads from self restraint to legislated prohibition. When did it become alright to force one set of values on the entire population?

Sent by Larry Dragt | 2:25 PM | 8-23-2007

I think the problem has to do with the parents. Even though the fashion industry had created this problem, parent are paying for and happy seeing their girls wearing this trash.

My daughter is eighteen in college, has very healthy self very confident and is confortable in her "modest" clothing.

Sent by Anonymous | 2:29 PM | 8-23-2007

I do think there is a dress pressure on boys, but it varies by class level. There is a huge battle at schools for working/class about how boys dress and how it identifies them as a gang member or potential gang member. I think the nexus of concerns for girls and women is about sexuality (too much - muffin tops; too little - head scarves and skirt requirements), whereas with boys it's around how the dress reflects violence levels or other anti-social tendencies.

Sent by A. Mercer | 2:38 PM | 8-23-2007

thank you for this topic. as the mother of a 30 yo daughter, i did not have this problem because we were still able to find age appropriate clothing. i now have an 11 yo daughter and it is nearly impossible to find clothing that does not look like britney whore clothes! according to the clothing store sales people, this is the clothing that sells! well of course it does, because that is the only stuff that is available to purchase. for my granddaughter, she is active in athletic activities with young people whose parents share our goals to keep their children 'age appropriate.' my granddaughter also gets a good dose of feminist philosophy to fall back on when she is pressured by her peers.

Sent by v mittelstead | 2:39 PM | 8-23-2007

The experts are saying the pressure to be "hot" is all on girls and not at all on boys. These experts must not know any boys. Or watch TV. Or read. Or leave the house. Boys face the exact same kinds of pressures as girls, they're just as insecure, and yearn to be hot and cool just as the girls do, but maybe they express it differently - or not at all. Three cheers for modesty! Three raspberries for the breathtaking ignorance about boys.

Sent by Mike | 2:41 PM | 8-23-2007

I'm listening on air right now. I have and love Shallit's book - Return to Modesty.

lets be honest. having sex eith a guy you hardly know and then leaving in the morning....Really sucks. The culture I used to be around basically told me to just deal with it. Well I dont want to. Lets encourage women to REALLY take back their bodies. Emily Walton

Sent by Emily Walton | 2:43 PM | 8-23-2007

In this day and age, you can't bring up religious pressure on women's dress without discussing Islam - this religion shouldn't get a buy if evangelicals don't, just because it is poorly understood. Just ask *why* women must dramatically cover up. Or are you only concerned with the majority, Judeo-Christian culture?

Sent by guy | 2:51 PM | 8-23-2007

I believe the most recent entourage of celebrity barings is having a trickle-down effect on kids and teenagers. I see girls younger than 14 dressing in ways my grandmother used to shake her head at for 21 year olds! I was not allowed to wear make up until I was 12, and even then it was Bonnie Bell Bubblegum flavored lip-gloss. I was not allowed to date until I was 16. (Ok, 15 and a half - my mother relented a bit). But she also impressed upon me the value of a wholesome person - NOT just a wholesome girl. Someone with a good sense of self-esteem and self-confidence didn't need to "sell their goods". "After all", she would say, "Why buy the cow when the milk was free." Good point.
In a similar vein of what the discussion is about - I see the Bratz dolls commercials and the young girls (maybe 8 or 9) in the commercials are wearing glittery tube tops, and overloaded with make up. If you like Bratz dolls, more power to you - but I believe they look like miniature prostitutes to be honest. But you have to ask - aren't they just (unfortunately) the embodiment of today???s fashions? I am not giving ANY child sex offender leeway here but I am going to say - anyone with a predilection towards that behavior may see little girls dressed up like that since they already have got a sick mind ---- well, why lead the horse to water without expecting it to take a drink? I am sure fashion dictates like this for young children or girls certainly helps the weak minded along... I don't have boys - I only have 2 girls - so I am out of the "boy loop" so to speak...how deep does the "boy image" go for boys? I understand how they may lean towards the Abercrombie models as discussed but I would be curious to know if there is a type of parallel behavior...I read a book not too long ago -- "Taking Back Childhood" by Nancy Carlsson-Paige. Perhaps it's time to start there when the young minds can be formed to follow a better path for humanity and we can take better pride in ourselves.

Sent by Angela | 2:58 PM | 8-23-2007

I don't believe this is "loosening up." I believe there is a generational shift occurring that will have long term consequences for our society.

I have observed a media channel that is having increasing influence on young people's fashion and behavior: internet pornography. I am a technology professional and the father of four teenagers (two girls and two boys). I have closely monitored the digital communications of my children and their friends including e-mail, instant messaging, and social networking sites. It is increasingly obvious to me that young boys are forming expectations and images of girls based on what they see on pornography sites. I have personally monitored boys as young as 16 pressuring even younger girls to dress, act, and perform sexually like these "role models." The girls who want to be popular with the boys are complying with these requests. I won't go into details but these kids do and discuss things that most people in our generation were not aware of until we were much, much older. These are not unpopular, rebellious, or "bad" kids. These are honor students at a highly selective magnet school.

These kids are far to young and immature to understand the consequences of the behavior they are emulating. I may sound like a prude, but I am deeply concerned about the effects of pervasive pornography on our society for this and future generations.

Sent by Anonymous | 3:26 PM | 8-23-2007

It's about time this topic was discussed. Whenever I brought it up in front of some people, they labelled me as "old fashioned"! They reminded me that it's the fashion now! Fashion is neither standard nor static but I am apalled at girls showing so much of their skin these days. I know some teenagers and their parents who really want decent clothes but they have a really really hard time finding any, without looking like their grandmother's hand me downs. Not every one can afford to shop at specialty stores either. Media is definitely reponsible for this trash thrown at girls AND BOYS!

Sent by rk | 3:48 PM | 8-23-2007

Why "mild" - girls can have exciting, dynamic, fulfilling lives and be modest. The "mild" seems to carry a stigma of being boring.

Sent by Sara Hamilton | 4:24 PM | 8-23-2007

I think there needs to be a seperation in public discourse, of support for the war and support for the troops. Especially now that the president is trying to draw comparisons between Vietnam and Iraq. I DO NOT support the war in Iraq. I DO support the troops. I want to support the troops by bringing them home, allowing them to raise their families and be the Americans we all know them capable of being. I want the troops to have generouse GI benefits, such as a clean and functional hospital. I want them to have access to support groups providing what ever kind of treatment they need. I don't see the connection between supporting our troops and sending them overseas to die while policing a religious civil war.

Furthermore, under Article VI of our own U.S. Constitution "[A]ll Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound therey, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary nothwithstanding". By our continued membership in the U.N. our government agrees to uphold the laws set forth by the Charter as national law. The U.N. Charter specifically states that only the Security Council has the authority to declare war. There is a provision allowing for self defence, but preemptive self defence does not meet that criteria. Since the invasion of Iraq did not have Security Council approval, it was and is illegal under the U.N. Charter and by extension our own Constitution. One last example, in Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 12 of our U.S. Constitution, Congress has the power "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years". As we have now passed the two year mark, the continuation of the war is not merely illegal but unconstitutional.

Sent by Tiffanny | 4:33 PM | 8-23-2007

One caller to the show tried to link the modesty movement to the Evangelical Christian movement. Nothing could be further fromt the truth. Parents of girls from all walks of life, different religions, and social-economic backgrounds are fed up with the trash that passes for culture of our young girls.

I went as far as to learn how to sew to give my girls clothes that are modest but nice looking. **They** hated that everything in the stores was what I called "Daisy Duke" style. I am not a Christian. I am a concerned parent.

You can look nice and modest at the same time.

Sent by Melissa H | 5:20 PM | 8-23-2007

Great topic! I am a 45-year-old woman, a step-mom of two little boys, who still struggles with the profound psychological damage from almost a lifetime "trying to make everyone happy" (except myself) by trying to be "sexy and wild", and/or "modest", and want to warn of the permanent damage that can be wrought on our children by subjecting them to our issues and these awful pressures. I grew up in a wealthy, sububan community in the 60's and 70's; I am proof that these pressures ahve always existed and always will, though are talked about more openly now. I was a shy, reserved, smart person, that on the outside was the "popular", great over-achieving honors student, great athlete, in "every club", "gorgeous", "very skinny" (I was a teen model), "perfect", girl. Inside, I felt very unsure of myself. My parents were very prudish re: sexuality. However, in my adolescence, my mom pressured me to "be more flirtatious; wear dresses more, you need to do this to snag a great, rich guy". "The competition for a "great, rich guy" will be stiff. You will never be prettier than you are now". So I tried to dress and act "sexier", although I felt very comfortable. had lots of boyfriends, mostly wanting sex, a 'trophy" on their arm, not too smart, and very shallow. The, from the other side, my father pressured me "to stop dressing so slutty", to attract a nice, decent, rich boy"> So i tried being more modest. I made noone happy, and made myslef miserable and screwed up, and I became less and less true to myself to try and win the "Love and approval" of people who weren't right for me. In college, My women peers were very verbal about sexual experiences and I felt uncool because that didn't come naturally to me. So my peers told me I was "uptight, repressed, and needed to unleash my true wil sexuality", and I tried being promiscuous and dressing more sexy, though it wasn't me. SO I chose a lot fo abusive partners, and people that ended up sexually exploiting me. I did alot of sexual things with epopel who didn't care about me to win their love and approval, by being someone I was not. After lots of psychotherapy, becominga therapist myself, and lots of heartbreak, I am now still struggling with being true to my real identity; who I am, am comfortable being ,and how I want to look, for me, and it's still very hard. Kids need to be supported in being, actinmg like, and dressing like who they really are, who they feel comfortable being, and who they are growing in to being, which can take experimentation. Kids, me for one, do not need ot have grownup's personal issues about sexuality and attractiveness and what is the "right?!" way to look like foisted on them, and fed the lie that this will win them love and approval. If you are true to yourself, and look like how you want, and feel safe, comfortable and attracive looking and acting how you do, you will gain confidence, a solid core identity and strength, that translates into a healthy identity as an adult. I tried to be "sexy and wild" in my dress and action;I tried to be modest; both were attempts to get epopel I thought I wanted to love and approve of me to love and approve of me. It doesn't work. It led to avery hard life for me of unhappiness and instability that I am only starting to really get through, today, at 45! In a 'perfect, ideal world (maybe?!) the ways in which people choose to dress or to act would not have any effect on how other's treat them, but I learned the hard way, that is just not so, on this planet. It's really idealistic and naive to hold to that ideal. The more kids are supported to be who they are and are comfortable being, whether wild and "immodest?", or "modest?", if it's the way ykids authentically are and feel comfortable being, they will be stronger, moreconfident, with a stronger identity in a world where those qualities are the most important. Inner dignity, peace, spirituality and inner beauty, being kind and doing what is right for you, mare what makes someone attractive, and kids need to be taught that in a loving way. Growing up is hard, with pressures to do this or that to supposedly be liked or approved of, or to have self-esteem in you peer group without having your parents pressuring you to be "sexy" or "modest" or be something they think they need to be to "be cool" of "accepted" or "loved" or attractive to the opposite sex". Let our kids be who they are! Talk to them about these pressures to be this or that inorder to be cool. Kids who are suppported in being true to who they feel comfortable being, grow up to be adults, who can figure out their real sexuality in their own time, on their own terms, and experiences, when they feel ready, and are emotionally mature enough to make those decisions well as adults.

Sent by Linda | 6:34 PM | 8-23-2007

Modesty is in no way related to adventurousness! I am by far the most liberal and adventurous person in my group of friends, but I'm also the only one who wears calf-length skirts or loose jeans, modest tops, long hair neatly tied up, and no makeup. I'm frequently mistaken for a Mennonite! I find that the attention I get from boys my age is not typical- they do not gape at me or anything like that, instead I find I can interact with them in a more equal relationship.

Sent by Rebekah | 8:19 PM | 8-23-2007

We must fight back at these oversexed preteen girls with everything we've got. Obviously, Madonna won the fight in the 80's. Just look at the statistics. Sexual promiscuity is up, preteen pregnancy is up, even states like Utah have "gay bars." What the hell? Utah? OMG. I mean, what is happening to this country when I can't shop with my niece at Abercrombie and Fitch for tasteful undergarments without some Lolita-type trying to seduce me every four seconds with her low-rise jeans and devil-may-care smile?

Here's a disturbing article on all this - http://getonmymap.blogspot.com/2007/08/oversexed-pre-teen-girls-lay-siege-on.html

Sent by GetOnMyMap | 9:06 PM | 8-23-2007

I agree with both Amy and Wendy. Wendy because even though I was not a part of this movement to modesty, I made my own moves towards being modest when I was a young teenager in highschool. I saw how other girls were treated, mosty by boys, when they wore revealing clothing or even simply clothing that was flattering. In response, for my own sanity and personal sense of security I wore baggy jeans, oversized plaid shirts, T-shirts, I kinda fit into the whole "grundge" thing. It wasn't until I was about 18 that I wore skirts and dresses to school, even though my mom bought them for me and made them available throughout. Also, it had nothing to do with religion, which I also completely and separately rejected throughout my teen years.

I agree with Amy in the sense that I saw Madonna, Britney Spears, Christina Aguillerra(sic), Eve etc as women who were in charge of their sexuality, and were using it as they saw fit. They weren't scantily clad bootie shakers in the background of some rap-star's video, nor were they sexless drones crooning on about how everyone hurt them and they were the victims of life itself.
Also, I always saw thongs as an article of clothing designed to maintain an even and unbroken line when wearing form-fitting clothing. Why can't we teach our daughters that instead of freaking out about them. Parent's still buy clothes for their 8-year old's right? So don't buy clothing that you find inappropriate.

Sent by Leslie | 9:37 PM | 8-23-2007

the modesty movement concerns me as a grandmother of 3 girls. i grew up in the 1970s and tight jeans and t-shirts or halter tops and miniskirts were fashionable. a girl's clothing did not necessarily predict whether she would be promiscuous, but some parents refered to such dress as "advertising" I would say there are extremes we shouldnt go to. I dont want my baby girls to look or act like sluts. But a self respectful person can also feel comfortable in her skin. I hear people telling girls to cover up and all I think of is burhkas. I know a tight jeans and bikini wearing grandma who has flaunted her cute body for 50 years and has slept with one person. I do not like equating fashion choices with sexual morals as if in primitive societies where covering up is not done, promiscuity and rape are the result. They are not. Enjoying your beauty, should not be equated with being sexually "loose". I agree with the caller on TOTN that said it's a slippery slope. The rapist isnt at fault because the victim was exposing too much skin. Think Taliban. Our society's penchant for equating skin with sin is to blame and not the clothes.

Sent by rp | 9:42 PM | 8-23-2007

At the recent prompting of our 9-year-old daughter, my husband and I starting looking for a magazine she could subscribe to. She enjoys the color and creativity of fashion, so we shopped long and hard for something she would enjoy and we could endorse. We found nothing - except how to have a great first kiss, how to get sexy abs, and how to use my horoscope to find the ideal boyfriend.

Several so-called teen magazines (that ostensibly cover fashion) dilute mature content and present it in a lively way. Sexualized images of girls and women abound, and soft sex articles are more common than not, even in magazines published for girls as young as 8. The more I researched, the more annoyed I became. I became so frustrated, I decided to do the unthinkable - start a fashion magazine for tweens myself. As I began to approach people around the country about getting involved, they would begin to relate their own experiences with mature media, sexy clothes for girls, and the tacit acceptance of sexualized images of girls.

We are launching in two weeks, and I'm so encouraged to hear and read that we're not alone. I agree with Sara, that being "mild" is a misnomer. The girls we've interviewed and who have worked with us to bring our magazine about are some of the most lively, confident, adventurous, and individual girls I know. They're not so interested in gossip, managing boyfriends, sensuality, instructions on how to kiss, or tips on getting sexy abs. They don't equate growing up with being sexy or "hot'. How refreshing!

Sent by Jamie Bryant | 9:47 PM | 8-23-2007

I truly appreciated the discussion of "Modesty" today on Talk of the Nation. As a father of a 14-year girl this seems so important and worthy of open discussion. However, I must say I was disappointed with the mean-spirited reply and comments by Amy Dickinson, the columnist for the Chicago Tribune. Amy Dickinson's tough approach may provide interesting newspaper reading as she replies to reader's questions, but her obvious distaste for certain caller's opinions does not make her a good choice for radio. (Wendy Shalit, the author of the Girls Gone Mild was most kind and accommodating to call-in listeners.)

Sent by Thomas Schultz | 9:48 PM | 8-23-2007

The day we stop having to discuss this topic will be the day women have equality with men. I keep waiting for the pendulum to stop swinging for us, but I guess I'm not going to see that in my lifetime - and believe me - it is getting tiresome. I'm tired of sexuality being equated with morality and I'm tired of the endless amount of judgement passed on women. Can everyone live their life and mind their own business? That would probably be too much to ask, but next time you think about passing judgement on someone - she's too thin - too fat - too stupid - too this - too that - why don't you stop and really think about what you are doing and what you really hope to gain from being a judgmental jackass.

As a woman I'm tired of the whistles, the cat calls and all the other endless amounts of neanderthal judgements I have to endure on a DAILY basis. I see it in men's eyes as I pass by. They take a moment to study me before deciding if I'm worthy of some lude sexual remark. Sure not all men do it, but many, if not most, are thinking it. I've become an expert - like all women - at reading the expressions of other people.

I'm tired of carrying the burden for a dysfunctional society that's unwilling to evolve.

I sometimes wish we could turn the tables and collectively decide to treat men like our toys for a few days, weeks, months, years. Would it make a difference if they had to carry the morality torch for a while so women could act like a bunch of drunken sailors with no cares in the world?

Sent by Rachel | 12:51 AM | 8-24-2007

I thank Goodness Amy Dickinson was there to provide a balancing voice from the real world to counterbalance the hysteria. While there are certainly valid issues here, I think Shalit is someone who found a molehill and decided to make a mountain to establish her name and sell books.
To insist there is not link to religious attitudes toward the proper image of women, or to a broader cultural shift back towards policing women's appearance and sexuality , erodes Shalits credibilty as a writer and researcher. Of course it is related in people's minds even if not in her original intention. . Look at the equation with what kids wear and morality- a judgemental 'clothing equals behavior" attitude (and a foolish assumption. While I was growing up, some of the kids who appeared the least threatening to my parents were actually the wildest in their behavior.) But of course, if we put enough emphasis on women self-policing we are absolved of responsibility.
Kids by and large are self absorbed enough that whatever 'message " we get from their clothes is beside the point. WE are NOT their intended audience- and believe it or not, for the most part the boys aren't either. It is other girls...and kids want to be seen as fashionable. Maybe the challenge is to make sure kids understand the message they are sending, perhaps without realizing it), when they wear such clothes.

Further, I have to say, this notion that slutty clothing is pervasive and unavoidable is nonsense. I am the mom of two adolescent girls. Where do you all shop that you can't find "modest" clothes? I have had no trouble. My kids live in a hip community near a large city, and yet have no interest in hoochie-kootchie clothes. I don't see a lot of evidence for it among others either. They look fashionable, comfortable and are not unduly 'exposed" . Ever hear of Target? Lands end?

I obviously hope my kids don't engage in inappropriate behavior. But this near hysteria about clothing really blends into our fear about protecting young girls from a world that can be very toxic to them. So let's put the focus where it should be: on the context these girls have to make decisions in, and stop the silly and pointless labelling of 'good' or 'bad', "wild' or "mild" based on clothing.

Sent by rachel | 9:34 AM | 8-24-2007

Being of an age to remember this exact discussion waxing and waning for the past fifty years, I don't think it's about the clothes; they're just a symptom. The true problem is the lack of mutual civility. When parents raise their children (girls and boys) to not only value themselves, but others, and adults model this behavior, this topic might finally die the death it deserves.
In response to the the speakers, I much prefer the sensible approach of Amy Dickenson to the rather over-the-top presentation of Ms. Shalit.
My daughter, who is twenty-six now, told me recently that she made her biggest decisions based on what her father and I modelled during her childhood. That was truly the best thing I was ever told.

Sent by J. Bostwick | 10:08 AM | 8-24-2007

I found this segment interesting in a car-wreck kinda way. Are females honestly that content to embody, not themselves as regular human beings, but as bland roles inspired only by their reproductive organs? From Ms. Shalit's vantage point, all females must watch banal romantic comedies, enjoy lengthy pointless discussions with their girlfriends, be unfunny and bitchy, only be interested in marriage as a loveless milestone, and want to breed like heffers. What a disgusting way to live one's life.

I'd love to remind all here that there are girls like me who find nothing enchanting in gender stereotypes. Some females are just normal human beings.

Sent by Amanda | 12:32 PM | 8-24-2007

I'm a seventeen-year-old female-perceived persyn, and although the oversexualization bothers me and my feminist sensibilities, I would resist being associated with a movement called the modesty movement simply because of the major social stigma that "modesty" has and also because the way I dress- men's shorts, t-shirts, flannel shirts, etc.- is much more practical than somehow linked to my morality or beliefs of right and wrong.

I'm not sexually active or a member of anything like the hook-up scene, but the demonization of people having sex at younger ages (not 12, but, like, fifteen or sixteen), especially when it's an educated decision and when safer sex methods are used really bothers me. The hook-up scene, although not my choice, is often valuable for people involved in it, and in my experience, has done more good than harm.

I don't think that style of dress has anything to do with any sexual experience I have or haven't had or with the sexual experiences of those I know.

Like one of the callers said, there are more important things than clothing to talk about.

Sent by Ellen Z. | 1:05 PM | 8-24-2007

1 Comment, 1 Curiosity:

Comment: As far as behavior and life priority "realignment" advice I've given some 20-something gals-pals (a.k.a. friends thats happen to be female) of mine, they've all found the following a very profound notion: "To have most of your relationship problems go away, stop dating boys and start dating men! Be aware that there are 35 year old boys and 18 year old men". I find it a little troubling that it was soo profound.

Curiosity: Regarding attire and behavior, I'd like to know what the guests think of all girls schools that have uniforms...

Sent by Shalin | 3:33 PM | 8-24-2007

A lot of people like to blame the problem with our kids on the media. Right? It's their fault for creating a young generation of hyper-sexual addicts in society.

Wrong!!

Most of the problem stems from our own class envy in which we allowed ourselves to buy sexually-charged clothing for our kids and suddenly indulging them in front of the TV set, allowing them to see daytime soap operas and prime-time teeny-bop shows on the CW or FOX network without parent supervision. Yet, we live in a nation of free choice; nobody however is putting a gun to your head under the impression that you had to be "cool" to wear this stuff in public. It's too bad that some folks out there would generally pass the buck onto to someone else, but no realizing that they, themselves, brought this situation on their own.

If anyone wants to blame for this sordid mess with our future generation in pop culture, then start blaming Milton Freeman and his philosophy of a conservative free market. Not Liberalism ideals.

Sent by annoymous | 2:04 PM | 8-25-2007

I really would like to get the guests' take on all girls schools and/or school uniforms...

Sent by Shalin | 2:27 PM | 8-26-2007