Liberation to the point of exploitation
Guest Column
Emily Fuller
SALT LAKE CITY, Utah
When, and if, I have children, I hope I don't have a little girl.
I can only imagine 20 years in the future the kind of supposed "equality" my little girl would receive. Quite frankly, if society continues on this "upward" slant toward gender equality, I hope NOBODY has a little girl.
Sure, things for women are looking up from the time we were about as valued as cattle. But instead of animals, we get to be raw meat instead, displayed on the dorm room wall.
I simply am tired of seeing my sex dragged through the mud and younger and younger girls drowned in it. Granted, we get to vote, but now can we please have the right to our bodies?
I am frightened that further generations will step into this unknown wasteland of female exploitation. If I can watch "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?," what will they watch?
Better education of today's young girls should be the game plan. Starting at the elementary school level, girls should be instilled with self-worth. Too many young women go by the way side due to lack of self-esteem and the oppressive media surrounding them in their most fragile moments of development.
The sexy images in magazines and television are aimed specifically at women and younger girls. Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera are some of the top-selling performers of our day.
Granted, they offer entertainment, but they are the ideals for small girls, telling them, "This is pretty, and you want to be pretty." Society is basically denying girls the chance to feel worth within themselves solely so someone can make a buck. Only one in a million match up to this standard of "pretty."
Last year, while flipping aimlessly through television channels, I stumbled upon the Olsen twins ("Full House's" Michelle) in a new sitcom. The girls are portrayed as 12-year-olds who have only two interests — parties and boys. I don't remember that being the norm when I was 12.
Shouldn't they still be doing something fun at that time? So I changed the channel to Dawson's Creek.
In high school, I had sex ed. I had male sex ed with a little "here is how a girl looks" thrown in on the side. I had the typical "No, no" speech and even listened. It wasn't until I began research for a paper in my senior year that I realized how little I knew, and I wasn't the only one.
It is pathetic, and even more pathetic is society's unwillingness to counteract the movement of sexual oppression. Instead, government considers not only taking away the right of a woman to make decisions about her body, but to her education about it as well.
Women are allowed little education about the ways their bodies function. Experimentation and word of mouth take the place of a stronger education. No one should have to learn about her sexuality that way.
When people talk about removing sex education from the schools, I don't understand what they are lobbying for. What education is there for them to take away?
The argument is that parents should do the teaching about sexuality, but a "No, no" approach will no longer suffice in today's society. Most parents will not sit down with their children and discuss sexuality just because the government said they should.
Where are the parents of the 10 year-old wearing a tube top and flashy makeup flirting with boys at the mall? I wonder what her parents are teaching her about sexuality — "Oh honey, just go watch some MTV."
Today's girls should have a full education on the topic of their sexuality if the media are going to slap them in the face with it.
The ever-present double standard further confuses young teenage minds of our day. Young women who are sexual, the way Britney tells them to be, are considered "sluts" or "whores," but young men with similar lifestyles are "players" or "pimps" and congratulated by their peers.
Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this picture?
Men are not entirely at fault for this. Women are half of the problem. If a woman does not put down the Cosmo for 30 seconds, or try to better herself by refusing to shop at Victoria's Secret, then she should not complain that it is hard to be a women.
Today's "liberated" woman should be doing more to help future generations then just wearing her spiked heels to work, hoping her daughter does as "well as she has."
Where is all the true backing of the worth of today's young women? Sure, Nike Corp. gives us an ad or two, but even then we're only pretty with the right sneakers! Would somebody get off the money train headed to Teengirlville for just one second to give young women a true identity before stuffing another "Real World" down their throats?
Women need very much to unite. They must stop giving in to bogus stereotypes and start teaching their friends and daughters the truths about their worths and sexual identities (like the fact they have them).
Society will not stop with the oppression until we stop letting it be an oppressor. Here's to you Maxim executives — may you all have daughters and may they all carry boxes full of makeup to fifth grade.
This column first appeared in the University of Utah newspaper, the Daily Utah Chronicle, on Aug. 25, 2000, and is reprinted here courtesy of the U-WIRE.
The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of The Observer.
All Viewpoint Stories for Tuesday, August 29, 2000
