Dear moms,
I have some information that might interest you. Last night, as I sometimes do, I sat on my couch and looked at social media on my phone.
I’ve been on vacation, so naturally there are quite a few blog posts and news articles to wade through. Wow – the Internet sure has been busy with the slut-shaming this summer! Some of my friends brought this to my attention, because as Christians and/or feminists, we notice shit like that.
I noticed other things, too. For one, it appears that I’ve been on the wrong path when it comes to raising my own son.
I get it – you’ve seen all those shameless hussies putting their pictures up on Facebook how our culture exploits women’s bodies, right? I can’t help thinking that maybe I’ve failed by trying to raise a son who respects women regardless of how they’re dressed. Clearly, I should have been protecting his eyes. I should remedy that.
So, here’s the bit that I think is important for you to realize. If you are the parent of a teenage son, you should definitely make sure he never, ever sees a half-dressed girl. Half-dressed boys are okay, though, because naturally, none of your sons are gay or bisexual. Posting half-naked pictures of your own sons flexing on the beach is also totally fine, since no one ever equates strength and virility. We all know that unless we see a penis, it’s not sexual anyway. Besides, it’s not at all exploitative to parade their bodies on the Internet for your own gain; everyone knows that’s much better than making one’s own choices about what to post.
Please understand this also: you are not responsible for making sure your sons know that regardless of what a girl is wearing, she deserves respect. All you need to do is assure they don’t see those pictures. After all, if they don’t see them, then you can relax in the knowledge that your sons do not know what girls’ bodies look like or that they won’t satisfy their curiosity by looking at the Internet at a friend’s house.
Not to mention that those “sexy” selfies your sons’ friends are posting don’t reflect who they are clearly demonstrate that they are temptresses who want to cause your sons to fall into sin. You need to be sure to remind them often so that you can keep your sons from acting like animals protect your sons.
And now – thank God – you have a good excuse to select who your sons are friends with. You can also have awkward family dinners during which you remind them that masturbation is a sin teenage girls are sluts they should probably not see a female-bodied person in her nightgown until they are married.
I know you’re concerned that these girls’ parents would be disappointed if they knew their daughters were causing your poor, defenseless sons to get hard think impure things when looking at them on the Internet. Obviously, you know that once a boy sees a girl in a state of undress, he turns from a respectable, nice kid into a raging, hormonal beast. You don’t want your sons to only think of girls in this “sexual” way, do you?
Of course not.
You’re also probably aware that girls don’t fantasize about boys’ bodies, so you’re free to put as many objectifying pictures of them up on your blog as you like. No worries–you won’t be causing any teenage girls to lust. That’s because girls don’t really have any sexual feelings unless they are a)married or b)they weren’t properly guarding their hearts. Naturally, they never masturbate or look at naked men on the Internet. And they’re not ever lesbians, either.
Good thing you’ve resolved not to give any of these teen temptresses a second chance to corrupt your innocent little men. I’m sure you’ve also installed nanny software and have a firewall so good no one could ever hack it. You’ve probably made sure that your sons’ friends have these things too. Don’t forget that awkward conversation you had with all their dads to find out if any of them had a stray magazine or several that you needed to confiscate before you allowed your sons into their homes.
I know that sounds harsh and old-school, but that’s just the way needs to be if you want to raise your sons right. Blocking, banning, and shaming is so much more effective than merely having open conversations about how your sons treat women. Remind yourself that you are raising men, while their female counterparts are mere girls. That way, you can convince yourself that your sons are mature enough to make adult decisions while these girls are not–and apparently don’t have any parents to help them learn and grow the way you’re helping your sons. Their parents will probably be grateful that you implied their daughters are tramps anyway.
Meanwhile, you should have in mind the kind of women you want your sons to marry. Your gag reflex probably prevents you from realizing that they may be gay, which is why you need to imagine them with women. It’s not creepy and weird at all that you are making these plans for them when they’re only halfway through high school. It’s never too early to control your children’s future adulthood. Besides, there’s no chance whatsoever that your sons will go behind your backs and date or have sex or whatever. And did I mention that these “men of integrity” are totally not ever, ever masturbating? Oh, I did? Well, I said it again.
Moms, it’s not too late! If you think you’ve made a mistake in raising your sons (we all do – don’t fret – I’ve made some doozies), RUN to your boys’ social media pages and block every single one of their girl friends. There are pictures of them that make it easy for your sons to imagine them naked, including that lovely senior portrait. After all, girls don’t even need to be in a state of partial undress to tempt boys to lust after them–all it takes is their mere existence.
Will you trust me? Your boys are crying out for you to teach them that girls are the cause of all their adolescent hormone surges as well as any other behaviors they may exhibit. Deep down, they are uncontrollable cavemen who cannot possibly learn how to respect and love women unless you protect them from the grasps of those alluring young things. (And also, they are NOT gay, so you probably don’t need to worry about protecting them from other boys.)
You are raising MEN.
Teach them guilt, sexism, and blame.
I’m glad could have this talk. Maybe we’ll talk again sometime about how we can raise our girls into women who feel ashamed of their bodies.
Mrs. Mitchell
Brilliant, Amy. Seriously great post. This mother of future teen boys appreciates you 🙂
Reblogged this on Lana Hobbs the Brave and commented:
A good response inspired by one of the latest modesty posts to make the rounds in the conservative social media world.
Great! As a mom of two sons, I appreciate your perspective.
brav-fucking-o!
Excellent post. A classic!
I have a teenaged son AND a teenaged daughter. If we aren’t having this conversation about respect and healthy sexuality with BOTH genders, we might as well not talk to them at all.
Bravo.
Aw, thanks, everyone! 🙂
BLESS THIS POST. I love you.
Thank you for articulating what I couldn’t formulate thoughts for past “BARF!” when reading the linked post. Sharing!
love love love. thank you.
EXACTLY!!! THANK YOU for saying what I have been trying to say for so many years raising 4 girls in this world of “boys will be boys”. BRAVISSIMO!!!!!
I enjoyed your post…but honestly, I sometimes have a hard time navigating through sarcasm so I had to keep reminding myself as I read this “what’s real here?” “What does she really mean here” etc… I would love it if there was the translated-asperger-ish type version of this. This is my first time visiting this site. I understood and agreed with a lot of what you said, albeit after some work through the double entendres.
I’m sorry about that. I sometimes have trouble with satire too, even though I occasionally write it. I have a kiddo and several family members who take things pretty literally and often need me to translate. That’s something for me to think about, and I appreciate your honesty about what might have worked better for you.
Awesomeness!! Love love love this. Seriously, you summed up everything I was thinking/feeling. You rock!!
This is freaking awesome. Says everything about that blog entry that I was thinking, only with a sharper tongue and much funnier that I could ever have managed. Forwarding to EVERYONE.
I know we’ve never met, but will you be my best friend and maybe raise my kids if something were to happen to me and my husband? THIS. IS. BRILLIANT.
You had me at “you’re helping your sons.” 🙂
I love you.
Excellent post, and so well said. As the mom of two girls and three boys (one a teenager who just entered high school today) I was appalled at that ‘other’ blog post. Slut shaming, misogyny, hipocrisy, saccharine-sweet backhanded ‘compliments’… bunk! Our sons are not animals with no self-control and our daughters aren’t secretly vile temptresses. Way to demean both genders and all parents in one big swoop. All in that “I’m just trying to help, you poor lost souls, you” tone. Gross. Parents, talk to your kids! Teach them to respect themselves, respect those around them, respect the world at large. And teach them to be in control of their ownselves, not to blame others for their actions/thoughts/feelings. For goodness sake, that should just be obvious!
Standing ovation right here. Thank you. Thank you SO much.
You are my hero. I am the mother of three boys and a baby girl. Thanks for helping me navigate this topic.
Best. Post. Ever. THANK YOU!
Awesome response. So sick of women being told that they are responsible for men’s thoughts and actions. Kudos!
AMEN.
I love you forever for writing this. (Also, I almost typed “righting,” which works well, too. So . . . I love you forever for righting this.) I read the first two lines of the original post on facebook and went, “I don’t have time to be that angry about someone else’s blog today.” Glad you’re on top of things!
This is an absolutely FANTASTIC response to that article. It made me so angry to read it and hear all the sexism and “slut-shaming.” Thank you for this!
Wonderful! I love this! I will not be teaching my sons to shame girls like the author of the other post!
I don’t even have the words for how awesome this is. Thank you for saying what I wish I were articulate enough to say myself.
Question(s): Why should boys respect girls? Why should girls respect boys? I’m curious.
That’s a whole blog post in and of itself, I think. But this post wasn’t about boys/girls respecting each other–it was about one mom’s opinion of how girls should do that for her sons and another mom (me) responding to that.
Is this a serious question? How about: people are people, and everyone deserves a basic level of respect due to our shared humanity. This does not change because of attire, or because of how sexually attractive you may or may not find them.
Wonderful. I had the most awesome discussion with my 14 year old son today after seeing your post. We read the “FYI for Teenage Girls”, your response, watched Robin Thicke’s “Blurred” video, and the New Zealand Law Student’s response, and ended with Miley Cyrus’s recent performance and twerking. It is hard to be a boy in our society too, where young men are steered into soulless career paths and taught that “economic prowess” is more important than creative, meaningful, fulfilling work. It was gratifying to see just how aware he is of the rampant misogyny in our society, and the compassion he feels for his 18 year-old sister. Thanks for fueling the fire.
You are a control freak, and would do better to teach your sons restraint than to blame others for their lustful thoughts. ~ Mother of two grown sons who believes in personal responsibility
How can you expect your sons to know personal responsibility if you aren’t teaching it to them with experience, knowledge, and complete understanding?
You are ignorant, honestly. Sorry, but it’s true.
She’s not blaming lust on anyone – she’s helping people understand that you have to TEACH your children all sides. Not just ‘this is wrong’. Because it’s NOT wrong to everyone. Not wearing a bra and snapping a photo isn’t WRONG. It’s distasteful for some, and natural for others. What’s beautiful for one person is distasteful for the next. It’s all about your personal preference. But regardless of that – every woman, no matter what she looks like or who she is, deserves to be given a chance AND to be respected. You’re pretty much guaranteeing that will not happen.
I’d bet your two grown sons have made a lot of mistakes, lusted, and loved. And I guarantee you that if they have been sheltered from things like this topic – that they are shaming, not respecting. Good luck with that.
Not to mention you’re completely missing the point. Why is it okay for her sons to be half naked ON THAT BLOG POST, but not okay for a girl to wear a low cut shirt? It’s not like her vagina was hanging out, was it?
I’m not sure T Rene’s post was directed at me–I think it was meant for the original poster. I could be wrong, though.
Was this directed at me or at the original writer of the piece I linked? I’m confused. Because actually, I agree, but I was saying it pretty sarcastically in my post here, and others have said they thought it wasn’t totally clear.
I think I love you.
Seriously, thank you for your sarcastic wit. I was seeing red when I read thy blog post earlier.
This response is genius!
This is so brilliant. I’m 23, but I still feel like I belong in the camp of teenage girls. I’m so tired of the shaming words coated in Bible verses and the name of Christ and then heaped on the head of YOUNG teenage girls. Thanks for speaking up to the absurdity of this attitude in Christian culture.
in my fifty years on planet earth i have never seen the double standard bear any good fruit —it makes girls resentful, and boys arrogant—people who believe the sexual double standard can always find reasons to justify it, but the bottom line for me is it just creates strife and makes good marriages that much harder to achieve
That, Margaret, is remarkably astute. Well said.
p.s.—-very good post
Amy – whatever valuable perspective you probably have to offer was lost when you demonstrated little regard for the facts and decided to just “go postal” on this lady.
For instance, you imply she does not teach her boys how to respect women, which you can not know. You imply they don’t have meaningful conversations about these issues, which again you can not know. You suggest she believes the sexy images are the total representation of the girls’ personhood, once again which you can not know. Nor do you know the complete context in which these decisions were made. I could go on and on, because unfortunately your post is full of these straw men. I would have been much more interested in what you had to say if you critiqued her actual position, which, to be clear, I think is worth challenging. Not only is it simply good form to engage in constructive and authentic discourse on important issues like this, your own argument is weakened and discredited because it demonstrates that you appear to be more interested in attacking the person than the issue.
I think you should extend the same expectation of respect that you have here to your opponent.
Kind of like how the original poster did for the parents of the teenage girls she was shaming? You know, the part where she assumed it was her job to tell them what they ought not to post? Or maybe the part where she paraded her sons’ bodies across the Internet? Ah, ok.
slightly off topic maybe, but everybody seems to assume the right to tell other people’s teenagers what to do—that’s something that hasnt changed since i was a kid—and that’s what the original poster was doing—trying to be the Great Universal Parent
Not off-topic at all. Yes, that was one of the things that bothered me–the original poster’s assumption that the parents of these girls are somehow absent or not doing what she thinks they should. She didn’t address her own boys, she was writing to these girls as though she had the right to do so. I would be pretty upset if some stranger tried to tell my daughter what she should or shouldn’t do/wear.
I think, by your own standard, you should show respect regardless. Arguing “She started it!” doesn’t help your position.
I think there is a difference between this mom shaming generic females who are never identified, and you shaming this mom directly. You escalated the shaming. And in doing so you’ve now encouraged a whole group of your followers to join in shaming the shamer. The irony is not lost on me.
The message I am getting from you is that it is okay to be disrespectful towards and shame people when they act disrespectfully and engage in shaming behaviour. I do not know you, but I have to imagine, given what good things you are trying to accomplish on your blog, that you are aiming for a higher standard than that.
I don’t see what I wrote as disrespectful, and neither did the thousands of other people who have read and commented. We all DID see the original as disrespectful, and rightly so–that was a woman who saw fit to attempt to school other people’s daughters on what was “appropriate” based on her own opinions. Since she isn’t really talking to random strangers–these are supposedly her sons’ friends–it’s not generic at all. No doubt those girls (and their friends) knew exactly who they were. As a parent of a daughter, I would be extremely offended if one of her friends’ moms wrote something like that about her.
Also, by being critical of the method I chose to use to call out this woman’s public blog (and public parading of her sons’ bodies), you’re derailing and avoiding the very topic this was meant to address. I’m not going to engage in this conversation with you any further, and if it continues, I will remove your comments. If you want to discuss the body shaming, victim-blaming, or failure to teach respect to our young men, I’ll be happy to talk further.
Ok, I accept your call to drop the argument about method and engage you about the issues. This is your blog, I will respectfully play by your rules.
I maintain that you have misrepresented Mrs. Hall’s arguments. This is not a critique of your method, it is a critique of your position. So then let’s discuss the issues and see where each other stands.
I’ll start with some basic thoughts on the issues you highlight:
Body shaming – Neither men nor women should be ashamed of their bodies. I oppose any attempt by anyone to make people ashamed of their bodies. Men and women also benefit from expressing respect for their bodies through the principle of modesty. While definitions of modesty differ, most cultures agree that there is value to the principle itself. Appealing to the principle of modesty does not equate to body shaming.
I interpret Mrs. Hall’s post as appealing to the principle of modesty, not the principle of being ashamed of one’s body – even if the end result was that the effort was clumsy or misguided and the girls experienced shame.
Sidebar: guilt and shame are different. I’m guessing you’ve probably read some Brene Brown and might be familiar with her definitions. If not I will gladly share more on this.
Victim-blaming – we are each responsible for our own responses to what comes our way, regardless of who or what generates the stimuli. If I am trying to cut down on sugar, it is my responsibility to pass by the cookies and not blame my wife for inflaming my temptations by baking a batch. However, if my wife starts offering me cookies for selfish reasons, knowing I am trying to cut back, then something has gone off track. If I eat the cookie, I am still morally culpable for breaking my commitment. She is not to blame for me eating the cookie. It was still my choice, and my fault. However she is now also at fault for a separate act – selfishness, un-love, incitement, entrapment, whatever you want to call it.
I interpret Mrs. Hall’s post as insisting that the girls be responsible on their end and stop offering the cookies, not that they are to blame for what her boys do with those cookies once offered.
Teaching respect to our young men – yes, yes yes!
But Mrs. Hall says nothing to indicate she does not teach her boys respect for women.
So that’s my starting position on the issues you are willing to discuss.
No, just no.
You might have interpreted Ms Hall´s post as level headed, but the ideology behind it is backwards. Like in the case of your wife and cookie. Even though you argue that she has blame to share, it downplays YOUR responsability in the matter. So you would not do an article asking for all the wives in the world to stop offering cookies, you would make a post about willpower, self control and the need to be respectful towards your body and health.
See what I did there?
It does not downplay my responsibility one bit. It simply acknowledges that my wife also has responsibilities. Flaunting a beer in front of my alcoholic friend with the intent of tripping him up would be pretty low, don’t you think? If he takes a drink, he is still fully to blame. But come on, you must agree I was still an asshole.
Mmmm… so, following Your logic and by extension, the girls posting selfies at facebook are assholes the same way your wife is an asshole for offering you a cookie the same way you are an asshole for offering your friend a beer…
Oh, my… you are scary…
And don´t reply to me saying that that is NOT what you meant because that is exactly what you meant. The girls are responsible for tripping those poor boys out there who do not posses any kind of self control let alone the capacity to respect human beings from the opposite sex, according to you and Ms Hall.
Dammit girls, dont be assholes!
While she doesn’t say she *doesn’t* teach her boys respect, she never says she does, either. She’s aimed her post at the girls, rather than at her boys. She has put herself in place of the other parents, being the person who decides what is/isn’t appropriate for them to post. Nightgowns and sexy pouts? Really? That’s pretty tame. People wear less to the beach, but I didn’t hear her equating bathing suits with sexuality. She implied that once her boys saw these girls without bras, their only thoughts would be sexual toward these girls. That astounds me that she thinks so little of her sons that she imagines them doing nothing but fantasizing about their friends. She also assumes no boy ever imagines a girl naked unless he’s seen her in her nightie without a bra. (Also, again, she assumes her boys are straight and therefore have an interest in girls’ bodies.) This is a common way to deflect from the culture that says girls become adults by *looking* sexy and boys become adults by *having* sex. Instead of a poor attempt at getting the girls to stop doing something she doesn’t personally like, she should focus her attention on helping her boys see past that or on helping girls feel good about themselves in a culture that values them only for their bodies. Her post did neither of those things.
You drew the conclusion that because she did not mention that she taught her boys respect in her blog post, that she does not teach her boys respect…at all. That is not a valid argument. You haven’t said anything about teaching your children the value of modesty in your blog. But I would not for a moment accuse you of failing to do so. I would have not grounds for accusing you of that.
She did aim her post at the girls. That was the audience in this particular blog. If I write a post calling boys to be respectful of women’s bodies, that does not make me guilty of sexism because I didn’t also include the girls in the calling.
I think we are both fully aware that what one wears is not the only factor when determining appropriateness. A guy wearing a speedo is one thing. A guy wearing a speedo pretending to dry hump the couch would be quite another. None of us have seen the photos in question. So we have shaky grounds for criticizing her response to them.
I do agree that Mrs. Hall should be teaching her boys how to deal with this stuff, because they will be exposed to it regardless of what safeguards she puts in place. And I do think there are probably more constructive ways of communicating with girls about the issues surrounding sexy selfies. I don’t think blocking posts from girls who continue to post images of themselves that overstep the standards they’ve set excludes these points, however. I think you can teach your boys, have constructive conversations with girls, and still block posts when those lines are being crossed.
All of that said, I am still interested in your position on the principle of modesty and victim-blaming. You haven’t really stated what you believe when it comes to those issues.
Okay, fine. I’ll answer that. I don’t think there is some magical modesty standard by which every person should be measured. I think people can wear or not wear whatever they like. Who gets to decide what is or isn’t modest enough? There’s a whole (male-run) web site devoted to this in which they evaluate girls’ and women’s clothes by THEIR standards. This mom chose to attempt to parent other people’s children ON THE INTERNET by deciding they had posted what SHE PERSONALLY objects to. She then commented (and you refused to acknowledge this in your reply to me) that her boys couldn’t “un-see” the girls in their pictures and that they would then seem them only in a sexual way. Doesn’t sound AT ALL like she’s trying to teach them not to view girls this way–she’s just assuming they will.
One other thing–I think sexual attraction is completely normal and natural, and it doesn’t require girls (or boys) to be half-naked in order to occur. It doesn’t require “sexy” poses or pouty lips. I don’t believe that attraction, arousal, or interest are wrong. It’s not wrong for a person–any person–to want to feel sexy. What IS wrong is thinking that because a girl has posted a braless nightie selfie, it’s ok for a boy to grab her ass or her breasts or suggest sexual things to her or assume she wants them even if she hasn’t agreed. THAT is wrong. Like it or not, that’s the logical conclusion of the “don’t tempt boys” modesty policing–that if a boy puts his hands or his penis on you, it’s your fault for making him see you only in a sexual way. It’s horrible for girls (victim-blaming) and just as horrible for boys (assuming they are neanderthals who can’t keep it zipped).
attempting to police other people’s children on the internet—this , exactly this—
It is necessary to call them out on their errors, even more so when what they are saying or doing is potentially harmful.
When you keep silent and left their claims or actions unchallenged, they take it as a cue to continue doing what they are doing because HEY, no one portested.
As much as YOU don´t like it, being challenged lets you reconsider your beliefs and change them even a little bit. Sort of like what you are “trying” to do here.
I am by no means saying Mrs. Hall’s post should not be challenged. In fact I think it should be challenged. I am saying that we shouldn’t engage in logical fallacies by misrepresenting what Mrs. Hall says, and then attacking that misrepresentation. This is called making a “straw man” argument, and is a common form of attacking one’s opponent in debate. Straw man arguments often sound good because they appeal to our filters and our biases, but they impede constructive discourse because they do not actually address the opponents position. More often, they address the position you wished your opponent had made. Thus the image of, instead of shooting a moving opponent, you set up a straw man that looks like your opponent and then shoot him, thus claiming success. Which of course is silly. And it’s even sillier when the crowd cheers.
There is no misrepresentation. Follow Ms Hall´s logic and you will find some disturbing implications. For example, so girls are not allowed to post pics showing skin and must be blocked for their sons to maintain integrity, that is to say, they will not be able to maintain it because the moment some pouty lips hit the screen the dudes will surely screw up. So, the girls are responsible for the way those guys develop, and THAT is a lie.
On the other hand, there is the implication that dudes can show a lot of skin and should not be blocked. Don´t bother telling me that THAT is not what she is saying, because Ms Hall herself had to create a copy of her post and change all the pics for ones were the boys are “covered up”. What does that mean? That she saw her own BS and ran to literally “cover it up”.
It is not about making straw men, it is about reading between the lines.
Yay! Someone that realizes the slut-shaming must end; that girls like sex too and that young men are responsible for their own actions NO MATTER WHAT! It’s not the job of our daughters to keep the caveman caged. As the mother of a beautiful, intelligent, kind, funny and built (yes, I said it) 14 year old daughter; it encourages me that not everyone is out to box her into either the virgin or slut trap.
Brilliant! Loved this post. Thank you for exposing the BS that article was.
Oh, and that mom posted an updated version of her first article, changing the pictures of her sons to fully clothed ones. Which I find pathetic, quite honestly.
It’s pathetic, but it also means she realized what a double standard it was. Win for gf here!
Indeed
faith in humanity restored!
well actually not quite restored, because Kim Hall’s post is getting an obscene amount of support from small-minded people
Bravo! Someone directed me to your blog post because my own “FYI” blog post has been garnering a lot of attention today. I adored your snark and sarcasm. Well done!
As the mother of a preteen daughter with whom we’ve had conversations about human sexuality, thank you for your posting! You said everything that I was thinking when I saw that awful post, and then some. We need to spread the word that slut shaming is not okay. God only know what kind of demeaning attitudes towards women that mom is passing on to her sons and daughter.
So what you’re saying is that it’s perfectly fine for girls to post mostly naked pics of themselves on the net because it boosts their self-esteem, but if they do, it’s not OK for boys to get aroused by said pics? What alternate universe do you live in?
VJ Amy isn’t saying that it’s not ok for the boys to be aroused by the pics. In the blog she has responded to, the mum is “protecting” her sons from things that might arouse them, as if being aroused is something shameful, and if the boy is aroused then it’s the girls fault and the boy is no way responsible for his own feelings/thoughts/actions. The mum’s blog is just as insulting to males as it is to females!
Motherloverdreamer, the mum does not say that being aroused is something shameful. Nor does she say the boy is not responsible for his own thoughts/feelings/actions. You are inferring those things.
Maybe you misunderstood–I was being flippant. Actually, I think it’s perfectly normal and natural for boys and girls alike to be aroused by each other. As I recall (though my teen years were done almost 20 years ago), it didn’t even take being half-naked. I have no problem with either the pictures people choose to post on their own pages OR with the reactions to them–provided the reactions go no further than arousal unless there is explicit consent and both parties are being safe.
Hm…and I just realized that I should say that boys are probably not the only ones aroused by pictures girls post of themselves–I’m sure other girls like them too. 🙂
Thank you so much for this! My MOM posted that other post on Facebook and I almost threw my computer across the room. Thankfully, I found your post and it brought me back from the edge!
While I have no children of my own I still want to say THANK YOU! As a woman who was raised with all female siblings in a house where My Mother inadvertently (perhaps because of her own upbringing) passed the social norms of shame, blame, and guilt, it is nice to know that there are people out teaching their children how NOT to be like that! LOVE LOVE LOVE!
Just yes. And thank you.
YES. Thank you, this is lovely & perfect.
Lol, “they are NOT gay.” Love this. Brilliantly written.
“…men of integrity don’t linger over pictures of scantily clad high-school girls.” – if she’s raising such ‘men of integrity’, why is she worried they are going to linger over aforementioned ‘scantily clad high-school girls’? And why is she posting pictures of her scantily clad high-school boys for the world to ogle? Sheesh, mothers of boys be crazy.
LOL! As a mom of one boy, I concur–I’m sometimes crazy! LOL. Then again, he & I talk pretty openly so far (he’s only 10), and I trust him.
Yes! I just read your article after coming across the one yours addresses. You said everything that I wanted to say. I am sick and tired of passive aggressive slut shaming.
Agreed–this is a terrific piece! I wrote something along these lines (but in a more straightforward tone) at my blog; please check it out if you’re so inclined:
http://rebeccahains.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/a-response-to-mrs-hall-teaching-our-boys-respect-and-self-control/
What a phenomenal piece, Rebecca. Thank you for sharing it here. I’m passing it along.
Thank you so much. I appreciate that!
Thank you for saying what I was thinking!
The absence of holding her boys accountable made me wonder. Here are my thoughts. http://www.juicsee.com/fyi-if-youre-a-parent-of-teenage-boys/
Amen. Thank you, sir.
Men and women have the tendency to mainline anti-depressant and bonding hormones through sexual images and encounters instead of working toward real-deal communion and intimacy. Our daughters’ hearts cry for a deep love, but settle for cheap attention. Our sons cry for a deep satisfaction that will only be borne of sacrificially giving themselves, but settle for cheap sex.
If we’re going to teach our sons AND daughters anything, it is what their hearts truly were made for and how to get there. And, yeah, the boys need us to block the images and our girls need us to draw the line with what they wear- when I was teaching my kids about how to keep safe crossing the road, I still acted like an adult and kept control until they were full well able to do it safely on their own.
Thank you! That was awesome…pretty much everything I was thinking.
%$#@$& brilliant. That mom had the cart before the horse. Thank you for restoring order. I keep wondering what mom would think of all those girls having pictures of themselves in their beachwear (which usually doesn’t include bras, IIRC) instead of their rather modest PJ’s…
This is all very pertinent, but you neglected one very key point.
Even if mothers (or fathers) successfully shield their sons from ever seeing anything like a sexually attractive human on the Internet or elsewhere, there’s still a chance their sons could decide sheep, or dogs … even fish, might be sexual candidates.
So, parents should shield their sons from all human and non-human living systems. Well, maybe non-living systems (objects) too, like telephone poles and economic systems.
Indeed, better to place them in sensory deprivation and never let them out. Only then an they be men of integrity and in just as much of dreamland as their mommy.
You’re right! I am going to go RIGHT NOW and make sure there are no pictures on my son’s account that might entice him. He’s only 10, but hey, it’s never too early to start, right?
LOL
I love you. ^_^ Thank you for posting this.
Thank you! I really needed this after seeing the blog post you’re responding to.
Thank you for writing this. It sickens me when people do not see the hypocrisy in what standards they are setting for boys and for girls.
Is it said that a piece like this only gets a couple of comments but the other one gets a whole lot more (in agreement)? Yeah, it’s absolutely disgusting.
The posts on the original get moderated; there’s a disclaimer at the top of the page. My guess is the writer is editing out all of the comments in disagreement.
Your point is very eloquently stated and I’m not looking to flame, just offer another viewpoint. I feel like the message of the first blog is being lost on this double standard conversation. My take away from the first one was to tell girls that there are repercussions for what you post online, including a parent who may see and not want their child to be friends with you. Maybe I need to go re-read it, but I didn’t really think about her parenting style or shaming girls into being embarrassed about their bodies and any of the deeper context you got from it. I actually re-posted that first blog in the hopes my 18 y,o. niece would see it and read it and think twice about her next pouty bathroom selfie where she’s posing sideways trying to look as thin as possible and show off the perfect gap between her thighs. I have two young girls (under 10) and don’t really fear the future gender double standards as much as I fear the Kardashian sisters. Again, no flames here, just a friendly difference of opin. on the message of that originating blog.
I definitely appreciate the respect I sense from your comment. Thanks! 🙂
I think the biggest problems for me weren’t really the double standard (though that was a big factor in figuring out what’s considered “appropriate” to post online). It was the way she never once suggested her sons have a responsibility to just click on by or that even though the girls posted something *she* doesn’t approve of, it doesn’t mean that the girls want anything from the boys or that they are entitled to take anything from the girls. She didn’t mention the boys’ self-control or their responsibility. She mentioned how she wants them to be “men of integrity” who don’t drool over teenage girls (yuck, because adult men shouldn’t be looking at teenagers and teenage boys aren’t yet men). Yet the way she suggests her boys will become men of integrity is to unfriend girls doing inappropriate things–or for the girls to stop doing them–rather than teaching them to show respect. She also has some odd notions of what’s appropriate–all she mentioned were nightgowns and towels, but not bikinis on the beach, which cover far less. She was put off by whatever faces the girls were making that she deemed sexy, but that’s *her* opinion and may not be shared by everyone. It’s just another version of blaming girls for dressing in some kind of “enticing” way and trapping men into lust. Meanwhile, we can’t even agree on where the line of appropriate clothes even is, nor on the definition of lust.
The blog post is misogynist and chauvinistic and grounded in a book that dictates that woman that is raped should be stoned to death or married to her rapist. The bottom line is that her article was attention seeking at it’s worst … and perpetuates the false idea that men are not able to control themselves once exposed to a sexually attractive woman. The article contains absolutely no intelligent informed information and is written by a bible brainwashed fool! I have always maintained that women are a big part of the issue with SlutShaming … Shame on her and her blog post … and further shame to her obvious chauvinistic bias demonstrated clearly in the choice of her pictures … this more than anything identified her as laughable and dismissible .. Yes yes let us protect her pure god fearing little boys from all the big bad slut female bodies … YUK YUK YUK . Warmest regards Ms. Pahl … Mother of 8 girls, retired social worker and woman that endured rape and slut-shaming.
But the Kardashian sisters are a perfect product of our culture’s warped “gender double standards”! Our culture teaches our little girls that their value lies only in the shape of their bodies, how virtuous much or how attractively little clothing covers it, and that her worth either way can only be assigned to her by an external audience, measured in fame, “likes” and attention. In such a world, how can we blame a young woman for seeking affirmation.
Both body image issues and the idea that seeing a woman’s skin can somehow ruin her reputation are manifestations of some severely fractured gender politics. We can’t build the house then damn people for trying to live in it.
very well said
OMG. Thank you. This is so amazing and everything Ive ever wanted to say.
Absolutely BRILLIANTLY written. I also thought that it was weird that her HUSBAND (another male) was “monitoring” these “slutty” photos on their sons social media pages. Let’s not even MENTION that since their faces are on her blog page, the amount of bullying, teasing, and public shaming THEY’LL go through because mom’s a nut job. This will also ensure awkward conversations with their friends, who won’t want to come to their house, and thus they will become social pariahs. This will ensure rebellion, possibly getting a girl pregnant, or even worse.
Way to go mom! (roll eyes)
Thank you for a well worded response to Stupid Write … You were gentle and kind … I was not so gentle in my response to the asinine and offensive blog post… Thank you for speaking out …. as a woman of 50 years old .. raped from age 5 … Slut shamed in a very small community … apprehended by the government under pretence of protection, raped in multiple group homes, Slut shamed as the “girl in Children’s Aid, the girl that was raped by her father, retired social worker … 8 foster girls all grown now …all raped as children … Advocate and voice of conviction to the accountability in us all for the Rape Culture we perpetuate … I adore you and anyone who will find a voice to start turning the tide of this Rape Culture we live in,( more like a tsunami ) as at 50 years old … I still remember the dirty looks, stinging glances and the disdain I felt from the many mothers not unlike the writer of the hateful self serving article … Thank you kindly from this Queen Exhalted Slut. Warmest regards Ms. Pahl
Wow! Sounds like you’ve had a long, long journey. Thank you for your kind words. I hope more women speak out about their personal experiences in this shaming environment. The more voices, the better.
Sounds like it is a stab at both sexes… seems the double standards have needed to come under fire for a verrrrrrrrrry lonnnnnnng time… sick of the double standards of society. Men need to stop treating women like a piece of meat, sure, but they also need to give women the same respect of not acting like a piece of meat on the hunt either. I do not care as to whether the individual chooses a different sexual preference than I have, they still need to treat their own body with the same respect. The rule of blasting and calling out others goes a little something like this: if you are pointing the finger at one person, three are pointing back at you. The biggest problem here is the fact that a person considers the greatest insult to throw at another individual to be the thing they most fear others will know they secretly hate about their own self. So if person A is calling person B a “slut” then person A’s biggest fear is that they already believe they are or will become a “slut” if they leave themselves unchecked.
All the high fives. Thank you for this!
Brilliant!! Loved it! Laughed out loud several times!
You crushed this and I go on record with everyone else who says thanks for saying what I was thinking.
Thank you! Now I don’t need to write a post. 🙂
FYI Mrs. Hall posted this amendment to her blog in response to all the challenges she got regarding the pictures of her shirtless boys. Some credit for admitting she was wrong to do so, although I wonder why she didn’t delete the original.
“Readers, two days ago I wrote this post for my normal audience, which is usually very small. That said, I included recent pictures of my kids at the beach, and many new readers found that to be a grave lack of discernment, especially considering the topic. I agree, and so you can find the same post here with different photos.”
I was wondering that too. Why leave the original up, especially since she’s apparently having to comb through and delete all the comments that disagree with her?
I am usually so disappointed in the internet. (BAD INTERNET!) Today, when I saw the post about the “Hall boys” and no new Caturday memes, I thought it was going to be business as usual. But no. I found a link here and this – this is like the diet coke at the end of my day. So so good. So right. I want to shove a laptop up Mrs. Hall’s butt still, but…you made it somewhat better. Ahhh. Thanks for taking the time.
“I want to shove a laptop up Mrs. Hall’s butt” made me laugh out loud.
Brilliant!
So happy I stumbled upon your blog! Your honesty is refreshing.
I love this! I love this! I love this!!!!!!!
Please let it be known that “Mrs. Hall” has gutted her Facebook of all comments other than those that adore her AND she has removed, or at least thinks she has removed, the questionable photos.
She has caught the attention of several news sources so undoubtedly she wanted to clean things up a bit for those who might go check her out.
Weakness binds the woman’s soul.
I am so not a pot-stirrer and I can’t believe I’m about to post this comment after a gazillion writes and rewrites and deletions and actual navigating away from both the pages because maybe I would forget. 🙂 So sorry. For realz.
I just have to say that – (And I so get your post – mostly anywho – so I’m speaking more to the commenters on both posts – that seem to have morphed into a gazillion posts overnight) – there are so many mothers and women who are out there trying to navigate through this shitstorm called life and none of us have it all right, all perfect, all good. And I know you know that. Zoloft, Klonopin (Not that I take those. Daily.), an occasional glass of wine or vodka and pouring my guts out on my blog is what keeps me out of the freaking looney bin. Sometime it’s a good pour, and sometimes it sour milk. I guess since I decide to post publically my mental upchuck, I have opened myself up to criticism for what I bleed that day. And I guess I’ve been lucky I haven’t pissed anyone off. Yet.
I ramble all that to say that I don’t think we as writers can be anti-slut-shaming, but pro-woman and/or blogger-shaming at the same time, you know? You don’t agree. I don’t know that I agree – but if someone started commenting some of the stuff I’ve read on her post – you can bet your ass I would “scrub it”. My dad and my aunt randomly visit my blog. My grandmother randomly visits my blog. I don’t want them reading about me needing a laptop shoved up my butt – you know?
Maybe I’m putting too much thought into this as it’s 11:11 CST and I’m slightly delirious, but I just unfriended someone on facebook today that in less than 24 hours posted about “All human life being sacred and abortion is murder” and then posted “Why don’t we just nuke Syria and kill them all.” It’s hypocrisy that is so effing blatant that I abhor.
Again – I’m totally not saying that that’s you. I get the tongue in cheek snark – I live for it actually much to all of my superiors work’s chagrin – but the commenters are fueling a fire that really could have been put with a dish towel, but now needs those helicopters that drop water from the sky. Or whatever.
I am SO sorry this is so long and I promise if I ever comment again it won’t be more than three sentences tops. SWEAR.
“I don’t think we as writers can be anti-slut-shaming, but pro-woman and/or blogger-shaming at the same time, you know?” My thoughts exactly. Well said!
Mrs. Hall is one mom trying her best at negotiating a soon to be man in a very fast-paced & electronic savvy world.
Rather than ‘mom-shaming’ (or ‘blogger-shaming’) why can’t we say: “here’s how she’s doing it, and here’s what I would do differently” in a positive way?
We are figuring out life and raising the future generation and will choose different avenues. Where’s the empathetic (vs sarcastic) tone of this piece on that fact alone?
Well said Tee
I was the one who wanted to shove the laptop, not the blogger, and I posted it in jest (and frustration!) on someone else’s blog (here) who seemed to understand comedy and satire. Mrs. Hall’s grandmother would have to link around the Internet for a while and read a ton of comments to find that, and if she has the computer savvy to do so – all the best! To Mrs. Hall herself, I posted a long and reasoned response that, nonetheless, never got posted in the comments (I guess because it was critical of her views).
Saying we can’t shame someone who is shaming is like saying we can’t be intolerant of intolerance. The difference between “blogger shaming” (which I don’t think I’d call this) and “slut shaming” is that sexuality is normal and girls are judged sexually whether they intend to be or not. Hall is not being judged simply for having a computer and blogging. She is being judged for her sexist views. She is not simply shamed for inherently being a writer or wanting to express that writing digitally. She is being called out for a hypocritical double standard – and rightly so. Being a woman or blogger has nothing to do with our criticism. Being sexist and does.
Exactly! Hall wants to have it both ways and wants everyone to love her for it.
Anyone who disagrees or calls her out is kicked off the island. LOL
Yet, another double standard.
Being the only left thinking person in an office full of Texan conservatives who love to shoot things, I’ve tried to perfect the art of civil debate, so please feel free to call me on the carpet at anytime. 🙂
Do you think it’s possible that it’s more of an “I don’t have daughter” thing or a pattern of sexism? I guess I phrased my shaming wrong – the attacks felt more like another mommy war and not a battle for women’s rights as it were.
I would tend to agree as her “my sons are perfect” tone gives that impression, but she has a daughter. She is sitting on her brother’s shoulders in the beach pic and shows up in a lovely “Little House on the Prairie” image on the new set of pics. I feel sorry for all of them.
Thanks for pointing that out. I didn’t see that earlier.
I don’t find it a mommy war (something I write about in my own blog) because her post was not saying “this is how I parent, you can make your own choices.” I’m not upset because they want to parent differently; I’m upset because of the way Mrs. Hall casts girls and women vs. men and the implications that has on my own children.
It told girls that they were wrong for being sexual beings and that it was their fault that her sons were looking at them in this way. It told other parents that they were wrong for allowing their daughters to be sexual beings. It flat-out said that men can’t help it, they are incapable of viewing women on any other level than sexual, and once again put the responsibility of how her boys viewed things onto the women they were viewing. This is insulting to men and women, whether Christian, “virtuous,” or not.
If Mrs. Hall spends that much time thinking about teenage girls sexually, Mrs. Hall needs to consider what is going on with her. What adult person looks at a teen’s pic on Facebook and tries to determine whether or not she has a bra on? It’s not a mom issue to denigrate half the population because she can’t come to terms with how to address the issue of sex with her boys. Mrs. Hall is shaming people for being human, for having sexuality (we all do), and for figuring out who they are as they grow (which involves sexuality). She is shaming other parents for not feeling as she does. She does not talk about shaming her sons into not feeling sexually toward these girls though (after all, THEY can’t help it). Here is the double standard, the crux of the sexism, and the frustrating point.
She is calling my daughters Delilahs and Eves and her sons are perfect Adams, tricked into sin by the temptress women. I firmly believe we all have the right to screw up our children in our own unique ways. Even Mrs. Hall! What I object to is the way Mrs. Hall is perpetuating the screwed up double standards of society that affect my children.
I agree with you completely. I need to go back and reread her post. And if she is deleting constructive opposition, then she has more issues than sexism. As part of of my bleeding heart badge that I accept as a compliment, my initial reaction is to defend. I may have very well picked the wrong person to do that with (meaning her and not you). Thanks for taking the time to talk.
Of course! I am definitely the first one to say live and let live!
Brilliant and poignant satire. Loved it. Thank you. . . . Whenever the topic of “modesty” comes up, I inwardly groan. Then frustration and exasperation sweep in, followed by a big dose of “I don’t give a damn.” Thank you for giving a damn, and taking the time to counter the overbearing “cover up!!!” messages that bombard our social media and the lives of us women and our daughters . . . and our sons. Our children – sons and daughters – need to be empowered. Not condemned, let off the hook, or micro-managed.
Such a great response. Lets teach respect and pride rather than shaming.
I think you all are missing the point that no one should be posting pics of themselves with next to no clothes on on the internet. It’s called pornagraphy,weather intended or not. Boys or girls. Wake up parents & get a backbone & some morals.
Phyllis, YES! Amen sista.
I think you might be confused about the definition of “porn.” Wearing a nightgown and no bra is not “porn.” Neither is a towel. Neither are bathing suits. Making “duck lips” or arching one’s back is not “porn.” What a silly thing to say, and it *also* misses the point. By your definition, the bathing-suit-clad Hall boys on the beach flexing would be “porn.”
Amy you are still missing the point. Do you have children? Would you want them in seductive positions displaying themselves across the internet for all to see. And have some depraved person redo the pic with some photo edit software. Wake up the internet is not a safe place.
By your logic, if someone is stalking them they would still take whatever picture the had and edited it, even if they appeared fully clothed and walking or standing or just sitting in it. And while I know those things exist, I think you are leaning to the side of full blown paranoia.
And still…. that was not even the point of Ms Hall´s article.
Ms. Hall´s article was not named “FYI, internet security, depraved people alert”. It was an article about slut shaming, making the girls that posted selfies at facebook responsible for how the boys´s integrity would flourish or perish. And what´s wrong with that is that the boys integrity and morals and values do not depend on wether they see selfies of girls at facebook. It depends on the education they are receiving back at home, something that on Ms. Hall´s article does not gets mentioned even once.
And FYI, I am not a parent, and even I can see what´s wrong with Ms. Hall´s logic. And yes, I would be worried and be mindful about the internet habits of my children (when I adopt them) and will have talks with them to see if there is anything wrong if I noticed odd behaviour which might point to a deeper problem.
But I would never in a million years take the “advice” of another mother when she is insisting that the only reason her boys are screwing up so badly is because of a pic one of my girls posted in facebook, all the while suggesting that she is morally reprehensible and the only one to blame.
No, just no.
From some of the comments on this site you all are reading a LOT more into what Mrs. Hall has said than what is written. She is just a Mom raising her kids the best way she can. I would do the same. I have two kids,a boy & a girl. If they put pics on facebook of themselves in towels & next to no clothes with seductive looks. It would say to me they are not mature enough to have a account on facebook or maybe even the internet. I am protective of my kids that is my job as their mother(not to be their friend). If anyone does not understand that it is not appropriate to put shots of him/her in barely any clothes or braless,bottomless or in a towel could cause a problem, then maybe she/he isn’t mature enough to handle facebook (This include parents as well)
The comments may be putting more thought into what is written than Mrs. Hall put into it, but they are not reading more into it, which implies that the criticisms are unjust. Whether Mrs. Hall realizes it or not, she has preached a double standard by telling girls not to dress sexily because it tempts her boys next to pictures of her boys sans shirts, flexing muscles.
And Hall is not even telling her boys that this is not acceptable behavior. She is not talking to her children about their behavior at all – just about the behavior of these *bad* girls. You are talking about teaching your children responsibility for themselves. Hall is blaming others.
In good faith you are more than welcomed to do with your kids as you see fit. But even then, I´m pretty sure you would also teach them about respecting others and you would not blame other boys or girls for your own kids shortcomings.
That and no more is what is been talked about here. And really, no one is reading too much into Ms. Halls words. Perhaps you should read Ms. Halls entry again and seriously pay attention this time: she is not talking about wether the girls are mature enough to have a facebook account, she is insisting that her boys will not grow up to be upstanding citizens with moral values just because of some selfies at Facebook (and even we don´t know for sure the real content of those pics, so really take Ms. Halls words with a healthy dose of skepticism). Hall´s making the girls responsible for how her own kids develop, which is a lie with a BMI so high is a wonder it did not affect the rotational movement of the planet. Oh, wait, there is no wondering, because is a lie!
Also, the original entry had pictures of her sons flexing muscles, just with a swimming short with no shirt on… all pics that you are saying you would not approve of… So what the heck? What´s wrong with you? Double standard much? Surely I don´t need to explain this?
Just wanted to point out that you are blaming boys and girls and their parents for the way some depreaved persons used those photos. Again, you are puting blame where none is deserved.
Why not talk about how and why those poeple are doing what they are doing?
And you know what? Probably, those people NEVER learned to respect fellow human beings and realize they are not objects to be used. Sort of like the way Ms Hall´s presenting her ideas to the world but most importantly, to her sons: Why learned about respect if we are learning to blame others for our own shortcomings?