Missing men? I was recently reading my new issue of Canadian Parent magazine. (The magazine was a very fitting gift from an extremely kind relative – fitting since I am both a new Canadian and a new parent of a little girl.) But while the magazine – which is generally pretty good – is called Canadian Parent, the reality is that it is basically aimed at Canadian mothers. To be fair, the summer issue did have three brief pieces that mentioned trying to involve men. One talked about recruiting men for social change efforts – although the main “dads” organization featured in the piece – Dads Against Dirty Air – did acknowledge that 80% of its active members are in fact women! Another extremely brief piece listed a male author’s five “truths about fatherhood.” Truth #1? “Ignore all parenting advice.” So it seems that even as we men get more involved in childcare, we are still not supposed to ask for directions! La plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose!
But the article that alarmed me the most was the one about the problem of young teen girls who want to dress in clothing that their parents think is too revealing. It was called “You’re not wearing that!” Although primarily addressed to mothers, the piece did briefly mention the role of dads. Unfortunately, the author’s stereotyped view of male sexuality led her to miss an opportunity to invite men to play a healthy role in helping teenagers – both girls and boys – negotiate their burgeoning sexuality. My daughter is still very young, but as she grows up I want to be able to help give her the information she needs.
So what makes a girl a “slut”? “Let’s face it,” the article says in its introductory paragraph, “When teenage girls dress a certain way, it can get them labelled as something less than nice.” True enough, but unfortunately the article gives us no tools to help young women so that they can question and resist the whole concept of labelling another girl a “slut.” It also fails to note that as a society we still celebrate promiscuity in men (“studs”) while condemning it in women (“sluts”). And there is no mention of the idea that since the advent of the so-called “sexual revolution,” life has become even more complex for girls: be too sexually active and you are a “slut,” but refuse to be sexually active and you are “a prude,” “frigid,” or “a tease.” Young women need good information to help them to negotiate this cultural tightrope. Information that goes far beyond wardrobe advice.
As I read the article, I found myself thinking about the book Slut! Growing Up Female with a Bad Reputation by Leora Tanenbaum. Tanenbaum’s book that discusses many of the real reasons that girls get called sluts. The book states that girls “may be labelled ‘sluts’ for any number of reasons, including expressions of sexuality, but also for nonsexual expressions of independence or openness, or because they were raped.” In addition, some girls get labelled “sluts” because they develop breasts earlier than their peers, or they develop larger breasts than their peers do. The author of the magazine article seems totally unfamiliar with Tanenbaum’s argument that being labelled a “slut” is about a lot more than just a short skirt.
Appropriately responding to our daughters’ emerging sexuality. The article assumes that young women who dress revealingly are unaware of the message they are sending out. This neglects the very real possibility that a young woman may in fact be trying to look sexy. Perhaps she is just conforming to the massive cultural pressure on girls to look alluring. But it is also possible that she may actually enjoy looking that way. Or maybe it’s a combination of the two. It's like that old debate about high heels: are they oppressive or empowering? The answer: It depends! And who among us does not want to be seen as attractive to others?
It is time for us to let go of the notion that assertive sexuality remains only a male prerogative. And it is time to create a cultural reality wherein young women are sexually empowered. Empowered to say “no.” But also empowered to say “yes” when they want to. The old messages to simply “resist the boys’ advances” not only do not work, they also leave girls vulnerable, with no room to pursue sexual interaction, exploration, and development on their own terms. All young people – boys and girls – need good information when they begin to make choices about their sexual interactions. And our kids will become sexual beings. So the real question becomes not about the length of a daughter’s hemline, but rather about what kind of information we want her to have as she starts this process – and where we want this information to come from.
Dads have a role. Fathers have a real role to play here. But it is most definitely not the role suggested in the article. The article reads: “These are conversations dads should participate in, too. Although possibly cringe-worthy for everyone involved, it may be useful to learn that a lace mini that females think is cute and ephemeral can be viewed as lingerie-like by the male mind.”
If I am reading this article correctly, Dad is supposed to wander by, and, sex-obsessed male that he is, contribute to the conversation by saying something like: “That skirt looks sexy. It makes me think of lingerie. And thinking of lingerie makes men want to have sex.” If a man did go ahead and say something like this to his daughter – well, that would be truly cringe-worthy! Cringe-worthy not only because it is inappropriate, but also because of its unfortunate assertions about male sexuality. Part of men’s real role in this process should be to help to interrupt and correct these erroneous stereotypes.
The realities of male sexuality. If we are to provide our kids with helpful information about male sexuality, we need to make sure that our own understandings are in fact accurate. The reality is that there is no unitary “male mind” when it comes to sex or to anything else. We men are not the sexual simpletons that society declares us to be. As society tries to turn girls and women into sex objects, it also tries to turn boys and men into sex machines. Through the mass media (including the torrent of pornography that courses through cyberspace) we are sold the message that our sexuality is merely a stimulus-response phenomenon probably occurring somewhere deep within the reptilian brain, and that as soon as we see the “sexy” products they are attempting to sell us (a short skirt, a slingshot thong, breast implants, or the porn itself) we should immediately be aroused and ready to perform. We are told that our response to these stimuli is “natural” – and that for just a few dollars (or maybe a lot of dollars!) these images and objects can be ours to consume.
But this ideology of a unitary and simplistic male sexuality is totally at odds with the current research that continues to demonstrate that male sexuality is in fact (like nearly everything else in human existence) extremely malleable and heavily shaped by environmental and cultural influences. (An example of this: I knew two American women who went travelling in North Africa. One was statuesque and thin and the other was short and heavy. The response they received from men in Morocco was the exact opposite of what they tended to experience in North America. In Morocco they were continually told that the statuesque woman was too thin to be considered attractive, while the heavier one was seen as much more desirable. Clearly the concept of the ideal female body is not universal, but rather highly culturally specific.)
A man’s ability to achieve an erection is a natural, biological function. But what causes that physical response – and how a man subsequently chooses to act when he is aroused – is heavily conditioned by his culture, his individual psychology, and his lived experience. This is important information that we need to know for ourselves, and to pass on to our children. Both our sons and our daughters need to know that when a female walks by in a short, lacy skirt, not all men will find her sexy. And even if they do find her sexy, they do not necessarily want to have sex with her. And even if they do want to have sex with her, this urge is totally controllable. Just as wearing a short skirt does not make a girl a slut, seeing a girl wearing that skirt does not automatically turn a boy or man into a sexual drone.
Giving young people the tools they need. One way to empower our young women and young men around issues of sexuality is to provide this real information – information that counters the dominant consumerist, pornographic model of male sexuality. Will having this information mean that a young woman might be a little less likely to wear a mini skirt? Who knows? But at the end of the day whether or not she wears that skirt is far less important than whether or not she has the information she needs in order to make choices around sexual activity in an informed and empowered way. And if her choices happen to involve boys, we can also be hopeful that the boys she engages with will have this same information, and that they will know that this dominant, rigid, aggressive, porn-infused model of male sexuality is not just something that the media are simply reporting on. It is in fact something the media has created.