Miley Cyrus Meet Marcia Brady

I feel a conversation coming on. Yet again.

I've already had way too many conversations with my daughter well before the appropriate age. How many more times will the actions of our teenage TV stars prompt discussions on topics well before their time?

Miley Cyrus, aka "Hannah Montana" of the Disney Channel, is in the news again. Click here to see the Miley Cyrus that our young children see on their early evening tv shows. Barely recognizable to the "slutty and ready" version of Miley in this months Elle.

I already had to have "the discussion" with my daughter last year when Miley posed in Vanity Fair. Miley said the Vanity Fair spread embarrassed her. Well as a mother, it embarrassed me that I had to discuss her pose with my then 10 year-old daughter who was quite curious why a star like "Hannah Montana" would want to do such a thing.

And its not only Miley. My daughter has other teen role models like Jamie Lynn Spears from the tv show Zoey 101 on Nickelodeon. Jamie Lynn got pregnant last year -- which led to another premature discussion with my daughter about teenage sex and pregnancy. Oh and now we get to discuss Jamie Lynn's decision to not marry her boyfriend. To say nothing of the conversations I have had to have about Jamie Lynn's older sister Britney regarding drugs and mental illness.

Which makes me wonder -- what ever happened to Marcia Brady? I grew up watching the Brady Bunch and Gilligan's Island. When stars like Marcia had dramas in their personal lives, those dramas stayed in their personal lives. And on air, the Brady Bunch girls were such goody too-shoes that I could only aspire to be that well behaved.

But beyond the premature discussions, the Elle photo reveals a much larger problem: the sexualization of our teenage daughters. Our daughters are growing up seeing their teen idols judged as sexual objects. How does a parent possibly explain to a teenage girl what the Elle photo means -- and DON'T tell me they won't see it -- they will -- it's called the internet.

What are these teenage role model demonstrating to our daughters? That a girl's value is not derived from studying so she can attend a prestigious university. Or derived from practicing an instrument so she can perform in the Philharmonic. Or derived from playing team sports so she can become a professional basketball player. No. The glamor is in being scantily clad and becoming a sexual object.

This infuriates me as a parent -- as well, I imagine, it does for millions of mothers and fathers in this country. How are we supposed to raise our teenage daughters to have a positive self image when the mediums around them reflect back this sexual imagery? Who is letting us down here? Disney and Nickelodeon for allowing their teen stars to appear in this manner? Vanity Fair and Elle for encouraging underage girls to pose in a compromising position? The parents of the stars?

When do we as parents collectively put our feet down and say enough! Sexualizing our teenage girl sells, but we're not buying it!!!

Because the tragedy is that we are raising a generation of girls that view themselves as sexual objects. And so, should we be surprised by these statistics:

• 1 in 3 female teenagers in a dating relationship has feared for her physical safety;
  
• 1 in 2 teenagers in a serious relationship has compromised personal beliefs to please a partner; and
  
• 1 in 5 teenagers in a serious relationship reports having been hit, slapped, or pushed by a partner.
  

Of course we should not be surprised. We are teaching our daughters that their self worth is solely derived by how they look and how scantily clad they can dress.

Where, oh where, is Marcia Brady?

Comments

[cobraxus]

I remember when Tipper Gore started that whole PMRC nonsense.She bought he daughter the Prince album "Purple Rain" and was upset that it contained adult language.Big deal!Only years later did I learn her daughter was 9 at the time.What the hell was she doing buying that album for a nine year old?Now of course we sell music to nine year olds.The problem is the manufactured artists used to sell this pablum are also trying to market themselves to slightly older audiences in hopes of staving off obsolescence.Yes it might be difficult explaining this to your children but sadly that comes with the job description.Your parents had it so much easier.They just left it all to The Brady Bunch and Gilligan's Island.Meanwhile Civil Rights,Vietnam and Watergate went on without your knowledge.Lucky You!

[CarlyHope]

I wore boots just like that at 14, is 17

[Shotgun Mary]

Yeah, I'm in the turn off the TV camp. If you dont want your child taking her values from TV stars and other people who may not present her with the values you want her to have, then make sure you're the one teaching your child. History is filled with strong, smart women that would be much better role models. Instead of explaining to your daughter why her beloved Miley is "slutty and ready" (really?) why not introducer her to more acceptable fodder? Its up to parents to choose what they will expose their child to.

[rektruax]

Consider the evolution of "acceptable" sexuality. Look at TV from the 50's and early 60's for example.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3285/2619072526_868630e47f.jpg

as compared to Marcia...

http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/uploads/marcia_brady_braless.jpg

as compared to Cyrus...

http://www.judiciaryreport.com/images/miley-cyrus-7-18-08-3.jpg

Consider also how readily available candid moments and personal info is made available via the web, blogs, twitter, etc. The bottom line being, your kids and what they watch are still your responsibility.

[Feanor]

You may be uncomfortable with the topics, but that doesn't make the conversatoins 'premature'.

I'd have to say there is a lot more danger in having this talks 'too late' than there is in having them 'too early'.

[jesselee26]

we're letting ourselves down. this is a culture problem and we're all to blame... the media and the parents.

[Materazzi]

disney is deplorable for having the negative influence on children it has. miley cyrus' character caters to young children, not teens. no teenager i could ever think of would follow the sheer nonsense of this show.
this show is truly bringing forward topics of conversation and exposing young children to topics of conversation and behaviors that are totally inappropriate for children. What a shame.

[CarlyHope]

But none of her complaints occured on the show

[TigersEye]

Miley Cyrus is an overrated "singer/actress" who obviously is getting almost zero parental guidance. Thank god my teenager is too old to be a fan of the little diva. I'm not concerned about the way she dressed and was splayed out on a table in Elle as much as the interviews and things she says. Imitating someone of asian extraction by making the infamous "eyes"? Saying she's going to "ruin" the band Radiohead because they didn't want to meet her? Put a muzzle on this kid, or teach her some manners already. If my kid acted like that I'd be embarrassed as a parent. She is showing virtually no manners or decorum. Practically living with a 20-something man didn't help her rep either.

[TigersEye]

As far as the rest of the article, I agree that as parents we must take the bull by the horns. You can give your daughters the freedom to be their own people, and encourage them to think for themselves while still teaching them what's "right", empathy for other people and having appropriate discussions about sex and its consequences. I don't think it's good for anyone to look up to celebrities anyway, it's not healthy and it's unrealistic. Teens should be taught to be good people and to have accountability for their actions. That's what I strive for as a parent.

[inmyhumbleopinion]

The mixed messages are indeed infuriating but wishing they would go away isn't likely to happen. And I must point out that when I was a teenager 30 years ago, sex and drug culture was just as prevalent, if not as overt. Remember Brooke Shield's "nothing comes between me and my Calvins'? Tell me that's not the same as Miley Cyrus and Vanity Fair--it is.

I really believe that the key to strong kids with high self-esteem is to focus on their intellect, their interests, and on self-determination. Instill in them that they have the power to set goals and achieve them on the basis of their own willingness to work hard. Kids who are involved, focused on academics, and accomplished are less likely to need validation on the basis of their looks or their sexual availability. They don't need others to tell them they are worthy; they already know it because they've proven it to themselves.

That said, parents also need to give them the tools to opt out of any situation in which they feel the least bit uncomfortable. While it may be impossible to raise peer-pressure-proof kids, lessening its impact is certainly attainable.

[chicagogirl17]

Thanks for all the simplistic solutions to the problem! The bigger issue is the sexualization of women and especially young women. This isn't solved by turning off the tv, anymore than racism is solved by teaching diversity in the workplace. Complex issues aren't easy to solve and acting as though they are limits the conversation that's necessary to create change. Reading these responses, I really felt that almost everyone replying was either not raising young girls (and I'm not talking about grandmothers, times have changed since you raised girls) or male. Sex and sexy women are everywhere you look. Turn off the tv. Fine, there is enough eye candy just driving down the street. Girls talk about these shows at school. Even if your daughter doesn't watch them, the prevailing attitude at her school will most likely be influenced by them.

The problem is that the shows exist because of our society and how we view women. We live in a time when it is perfectly fine for Wimbledon organizers to put "sexier" women on centre court instead of the world's best players. They readily admit it and no one really bats an eyelash.

Turn off the tv . . . I wish it were that simple.

[snarkopolitan]

Yes, the indemic perception of and sexualization of women in our society is a huge and complex problem. Merely turning off the TV is not going to solve it in the short run, though if enough people, including female people who eat celebutainment up, turned it off, it would have a pronounced effect.

Turning off the TV and keeping women's fashion magazines out of the hands of ten-year-olds is a start. But what is disturbing about this article to me as a feminist is Siskind's evoking a fictional, plastic, shallow, boy-and clothes-crazed television character as a good role model at all. What is feminist about that?

The serious problems of sexualization of younger and younger children deserve a more serious treatment than pop-culture nostalgia, however meme-ready a headline it makes.

[lgalloway]

I commented earlier... and am the mother of a gorgeous, strong, accomplished, levelheaded 20 year old daughter.
The sexualization of women and young women is NOT a new trial for females. We have it easier than our predecessors or than modern women in countries where women are still chattel, still have no political voice... it's hard to compare the perils of questionable role models and marketing tactics with rape by Janjaweed pigs who just torched a village. Let's have at least a semblance of perspective here.
I successfully raised a well-grounded daughter because I RELENTLESSLY had the conversations that this article's authors insists are burdensome, because her father set the bar very high when it came to her expectations of treatment by men, because I turned the TV off and pre-read her books and didn't allow unfettered access to the internet and cellphones until she was fully ready to deal with the implications of these technologies. We loved her, disciplined her, made sure our "no's" were "no's" and listened to her as she shaped, phrased and rephrased all her questions... even when the subject matter wasn't entirely comfortable... or when we felt we'd had the discussions 20 times before.
Give your girls the standards, information and confidence to handle discussions about these shows and "role models"... they can handle it, IF you've done your job and prepared them... and if they know they can always come to you, as a parent, for clarification, encouragement and suppport.

[inmyhumbleopinion]

Amen. When we abdicate our role as parents, we do our daughters a huge disservice.

[GEM-592]

Some problems have simple answers ... why does your daughter look up to MC, really?

[GEM-592]

The sooner your daughter learns that TV stars shouldn't necessarily be taken for role models, the better.

[GrahamInCanada]

"Because the tragedy is that we are raising a generation of girls that view themselves as sexual objects. And so, should we be surprised by these statistics:" Ms. Siskind wrote, giving shocking statistics and providing a link.

The link leads to US Senate Resolution 388 (2009), which gives these statistics and more from a survey released by the Family Violence Prevention Fund June 10, 2009. The survey did not attempt scientific rigor but instead used marketing methods and internet self-selection. The survey results can be found here:

http://www.caepv.org/membercenter/files/lci_fvpf_teen_dating_abuse_survey_2009_topline_results.doc

Interesting, the survey did not conclude that the statistics are linked to any of the concerns raised by Ms. Siskind. Instead, as the press release notes:

"Teens nationwide are experiencing significant levels of dating abuse, and the economy appears to be making it worse. Nearly half of teens (44 percent) whose families have experienced economic problems in the past year report that they have witnessed their parents abusing each other. Sixty-seven percent of these same teens experienced some form of violence or abuse in their own relationships and report a 50 percent higher rate of dating abuse compared to teens who have not witnessed domestic violence between their parents."

http://endabuse.org/content/press_room/detail/1279/

This would have been a far better article if it explored the actual results of this survey, rather than making post hoc ergo propter hoc assumptions.

[CanisLatrans]

It is a lot easier to say "turn off the TV and be there" than it can be to actually DO it.

Given the way the country has been run for some time, with wages staying well below the inflation curve and this bizarre insistence in the US that everyone's self worth hinges on buying more stuff, being in debt, and pursuing "more", then both parents will have to work like sled dogs just to keep food on the table.

Plus, with wireless devices being the norm, unless you're prepared to literally follow your kid everywhere they go and keep an eye over their shoulder at eaverything they see, there will be times when you just can not control what they find.

Parents just have to be up front with their kids and tell them that there's a lot of trash out there, and how to deal with it/see it for what it is. It's unfortunate that kids have to become so street smart so early, but there's no turning back the clock no matter how attractive a notion it might be.

[euripedes923]

You are allowing your daughter to be saturated by media.
You are the parent.
Turn off the TV; move the computer to the kitchen or family room.
Take walks, read boos together, choose films wisely.
There are many better role models than Hannah or Zoey or Vogue or Elle out there.
You're the parent; set the tone and guide the choices.
This isn't actually hard to do.

[seanosul]

You have obvious difficulties with childcare, not content are you with telling your daughter the resignation of Palin was one of the worst moments of American history, you buy your her adult magazines. Now, please explain what your reaction would have been if anyone else called Miley Cyrus, "slutty and ready"?

[Jazz88105]

I have a suggestion turn off the TV

[seanosul]

I just find it hypocritical of Amy Siskind, who claims to stand for the promotion of woman and girls to call Miley Cyrus, "slutty and ready" because of a photoshoot she did in Elle Magazine.

Looks like she is getting called out for it http://thebigotbasher.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/where-are-the-puma-lot-now/