Natasha Walter in The Guardian

One of the books I am most looking forward to reading soon is Natasha Walter’s forthcoming book Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism. My copy is pre-ordered! Seven days to go!

Kira Cochrane interviewed her for The Guardian a couple of days ago:

Walter and her partner have two ­children, Clara, nine, and Arthur, one, and it was becoming a mother that partly inspired the second half of ­Living Dolls. In this section, Walter looks at the way that arguments for biological determinism have suddenly multiplied in recent years. She ­delivers a ­convincing critique of the studies that have been used to imply that children are biologically programmed to fit social stereotypes – that boys have a natural love of blue and cars and guns, and that girls have a natural love of pink and prams and dolls.

When Walter first had her daughter, she says, “I was hit by this deluge of pink. Then, at friends’ houses, you’d walk into a boy’s bedroom, and it would just be blue and navy, and full of cars and Action Men. I found that when I raised this – even with really liberal parents – they would say, ‘But boys and girls are just different. She just LOVES pink.’ Or, ‘It’s such a pity that he doesn’t play with dolls, but he just doesn’t get it.’ They would be ­saying this, sort of bemoaning it, but ­endlessly reinforcing [gender] ­stereotypes in an almost unconscious way . . . I’d hear things like, ‘Well, he wanted to do ballet, but he’d be the only boy in the class, so obviously he couldn’t do it,’ and you’d think, ‘Why obviously?’.”

But, as ever with CiF, do yourself a favour and don’t read the comments. Urgh.

9 Comments
January 28, 2010 in book news, feminism, news & media, politics, women's history
Tagged , , ,

9 Responses

  1. This book sounds quite interesting and one I wouldn’t mind reading. Thanks for the heads up on it. Cheers!

  2. I read this article yesterday and thought it was hugely interesting. She makes some very interesting observations about young women that mirrored similar observations I have made. I think it alarming that young 20-somethings think it’s perfectly okay to get their bits out, cover themselves in fake “I’ve-been-tangoed” tans and wear six inches of makeup because it “empowers” them. Or maybe I’m just old-fashioned?

  3. 1. Should we be judging whether it is “okay” for other women to adopt particular forms of dress or appearance?

    2. Comments about orange tans seem to me to have more to do with class-based judgments than with real concern for the independence and well-being of the women in question. I can almost hear my mother saying “common”.

    3. The points about pole-dancing etc in the Walter interview seem to me to be in a different category. I’d take some convincing that this empowers anyone other than the capitalist who makes the profit from it.

    4. I am uncomfortable with my own daughter’s girliness. I am not, however, sure I ought to be. I was encouraged to learn that I may have provided her with some lessons in applied feminism. She was playing houses with my partner’s nephew, and as he was about to go out to work told him, “No L***, it’s my turn to go out to work now”.
    I have lots of frivolous tastes, but that does not mean I am not to be taken seriously. Why is a pink version of frivolity any worse, if what the pink princesses actually see is their mothers doing a proper job of work?

  4. Looks like an interesting (and, clearly, controversial) read – definitely going on my Wish List!

  5. Going on my wishlist also. The interview was extremely interesting.

  6. Oh no. I knew my comment would get me into trouble. I’ll clarify shall I? I don’t judge people on appearances and it’s perfectly fine if someone wants to dress provocatively, cover themselves in fake tan and wear a load of make-up — as long as that is what they want to do. But from Walter’s piece it’s clear that many think it’s the only way to be popular/attract friends/find love etc and that they are doing it through peer pressure. Or, as Kirsty so eloquently points out, “because they’re too scared to say they don’t want to”. I think it sad that women, of all shapes, sizes, colours etc, can’t be free to be themselves and not to be continually bowing to an image/agenda set by other people.

  7. As a none parent it bothers me to see the way many children – mostly girls – are dressed. I have a personal and so probably irrational dislike of fancy dress on the street and fail to see why a child should wonder around the streets dressed as a princess or a fairy; it seems over indulgent to me. Even more do I dislike young girls dressed as women. It makes me feel that parents are turning their daughters into mini me dolls which somehow strikes me as a bad thing.

  8. I was on fine, dogmatic form the other night, I’m afraid… Instinctively it feels as if provocative dressing must result from some degree of pressure to conform, or to please, and that that the pressure must derive from what is perceived to please men. Peer pressure on young girls very often comes, at least directly, from other young girls. I think if I am honest I have always worried more about the judgments of other women than about those of men, so far as appearance is concerned, and certainly when I was younger it was judgment of female peers that caused me more pain and angst. But the roots are in aeons of societal pressure to please men. And all of these factors make it a feminist issue for one reason or another. Which is my longwinded way of saying “you’re right”. It is worth remembering, though, that young men also are under pressure to conform, and sometimes engage in very damaging behaviour in the course of conforming.

    Maybe young male children lose out a bit; by they time they get to 6 all the fun, colourful clothes have turned into mini-versions of the drab stuff that a lot of adult males wear!

Leave a Reply

Using Gravatars in the comments - get your own and be recognized!

XHTML: These are some of the tags you can use: <a href=""> <b> <blockquote> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>