Motherhood in Millburn: Beauty and Brains
The fallacy of assuming one negates the other.
My daughter's Christmas list this year was further proof of her burgeoning teen-ness. Gone were the American Girl dolls and other toys that used to dot her list and in their place were requests for electronics, clothes and shoes, and makeup.
Not once looking at her list did I worry that my daughter was going to fall victim to a society where her looks are valued above all else and she'd rather win America's Top Model than a Nobel Prize.
The author Lisa Bloom in her provocative article "How to Talk to Little Girls" opines that in order to avoid our daughters feeling that their self worth comes from their looks we should only talk to them about books, and intellectual pursuits and avoid complimenting them on their looks at all cost. If not we risk raising girls who start getting plastic surgery at the same time they get their learner's permits.
That article, one of the most shared of this past year, really irked me. Bloom unwittingly supports those who believe that woman can be pretty or smart but not both.
I think my children are beautiful. So much so that at times, they take my breath away. And yes, I tell them they are beautiful, because that's how I feel about them. I don't think telling my daughter she is beautiful will result in a woman who doesn't think for herself, or read books or have a thirst for knowledge.
My daughter and I discuss fashion, but we also discuss books, politics, friendships, our world and our lives. Bloom assumes that discussing fashion means I can't or won't discuss the other with my daughter. That my daughter is veering off toward vanity and pettiness.
My daughter is both smart and beautiful. I want her to understand that both are part of who she is, and that being beautiful isn't a free pass. It isn't anything at all, unless you have some substance to back it up. Yes, nothing is more boring than a beautiful person with nothing to talk about. But I also want her to feel free to love Forever 21 and biology. I want her to be who she is and not feel that she has to downplay any part of her in order to be taken seriously. She can win a Noble Prize and still love Sephora without being shallow or vapid.
I think it's important to talk to my child and ask questions rather than tell them how wonderful they are all the time. I also don't want my daughter to base her self worth on her looks as Bloom says. However to assume that by telling her that looks aren't everything or refusing to discuss the issue at all my child will grow up and not wonder about her appearance and attractiveness is impossible. Has Bloom forgotten what it's like to be a teenager? I remember how a pimple, invisible to everyone but me, could ruin my day, and yet I've managed to grow up to be a pretty well-adjusted person.
That's all I want for my daughter, to grow into a content, well-adjusted woman, who embraces the parts of her that make her unique. I want her to live in a world where people aren't surprised a beautiful woman is intelligent, because it's not one or the other. You can be brilliant, beauty and all.
M OKeef
2:42 pm on Saturday, December 31, 2011
No better model than Natalie Portman. In high school, she was named an Intel Semifinilast. Per Wikipedia, Portman skipped the premiere of her film Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace so she could study for her high school final exams.[25] In 2003, Portman graduated from Harvard College with a B.A. degree in psychology.[24][26][27][28] "I don't care if [college] ruins my career," she told the New York Post, according to a Fox News Channel article. "I'd rather be smart than a movie star."
Jaleh Teymourian Brahms
12:32 pm on Monday, January 2, 2012
Yes, Portman is a fantasic example. If we are looking at examples of 'famous' beautiful-brilliant women we should also look at Heddy Lamarr the beautiful actress who also invented a frequency hopping system for torpedo guidance that has been credited as the basis for our modern Wi-Fi systems. Cindy Crawford is another, and the list goes on.
Jocelyn Pihlaja
11:52 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
I so agree. There is something over-reactive about the post-feminist generation's need to emphasize only intelligence and "other traits not physical." But let's flip that--let's stop only feeling for the girl who is smart as ye olde whip but maybe not striking....what of the girl who is absolutely lovely in her being but "average" in intelligence...have we now constructed a culture that must hold its tongue in regards to her gifts?