What I researched and why: The idea that kept striking me as we were talking about “mean girls” was that in reality what a mean girl was, was a girl who was standing up for herself. One who doesn’t allow others to influence the way she behaves. Of course, this isn’t entirely positive in that mean girls often hurt others around them as a result of her actions. However, it also meant that girls were standing up for themselves. I wanted to delve a little deeper into what being a mean girl meant to others on a deeper level. So, I thought back to Margaret Finders’ book Just Girls.
What I found: In the book there are two social groups which were examined. The first is the “Queen Bees” and the other is the “Tough Cookies.” The queen bees were of course, the popular girls, whereas the tough cookies were not. Almost all of the “cookies” were from a neighboring trailer park…coming from low income families. The study was conducted to find out about the “hidden literacies and life in junior high.” What Finders found was that many literary events in the school were exclusionary toward the tough cookies. Most notably, was the signing of yearbooks which every teacher observed gave time for in class.
“Constant comments from Northern Hills staff that ‘Everybody gets one’ and ‘Everyone loves them’ reveal that [the tough cookies] and many others were invisible to school personnel…While students may not have purchased a yearbook for a variety of reasons, the socioeconomic status of families may have been a critical issue. For whatever reason, when teachers rewarded students with ‘signing time,’ one out of four students was not able to participate” (36).
My Interpretation: The above quote is just one example of how the “Queens” were dominant over the “Cookies” in terms of literacy. The queens would also exclude the cookies from note passing, bathroom wall writing, yearbook signing and often refer to them as the “woof-woofs” (meaning they were dogs--in case you weren‘t sure, yes, that‘s what they meant). The teachers also made general references in favor of the “Queens.” “Some teachers described their class makeup in terms of numbers of students from trailer parks. A teacher’s comment such as ‘I’ve got seven trailer-park kids’ conveyed to other teachers the implicit yet clearly understood assumption of impending trouble for that teacher” (37).
This, to me, represents the “other side” of the mean girl phenomenon. I’m sure each and every girl has been a victim of a mean girl at some point or another; but these girls were basically forced to be uncomfortable in school every single day. To me, that is by far the largest negative of the mean girl phenomenon. While I do think it’s wonderful that girls are no longer required to be seen and not heard, passive, and submissive, I do not think that terrorizing other girls is the most desirable option.
(Another side note from the book--the only time the girls from the two circles would interact via notes was when one received a chain letter stating “You will have bad luck with boys for the rest of your life”--or something of the sort. Therefore making male attention still more important than “being mean.” And therefore suggesting that being a “mean girl” is perhaps not as empowering as I thought.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Wow, the thing I found most interesting about Mandy's post was the discussion of the adult teachers' participation in the "mean girl" phenomenon. I'm trying to remember if any of my teachers behaved this way when I was younger, as I went to a school with kids from an extremely wide range of economic backgrounds. I'm sure it happened without my noticing.
Also, I wonder how the wealthy BOYS were treated versus the "trailer park boys," both by the teachers and other students--is it different for them?
I agree with this post. I never really understood how being mean, or this mean girl phenomenon, could be linked to female empowerment. To me, that makes no sense. Feminism, or at least what I understand about it, is about fighting unfair gender stereotypes and gaining equality among the sexes. How does attacking the emotions of other women make any progress towards this goal? Any group that wants to empower themselves against another group (in this case, a male-dominated establishment) must know that forging together and uniting should be much more effective than infighting. "Mean" girls may be empowering themselves individually, but at the same time are setting back their gender in the struggle for cultural equality.
This is an interesting post because I want to teach someday and I didn't realize that giving time for signing yearbooks created such a divide in a class. To keep peace in a classroom teachers must not let difference of income, race, intellegence, etc get in the way of a students education. This is not directly affecting education of the student but causing conflict in a class affects a students ability to learn and therefore is a problem.
I plan to teach with Teach for America after I graduate. This post really concerned me because it opened my eyes to how many different ways a teacher's actions could unintentionally harm his or her students. I think the only way to really prevent these kinds of situations is to really think things through before you act, especially when dealing with kids. I also think this post works in an interesting way with the socio-economic underbelly of "Flight." I wonder what economic divides could be found between children in other books we've read. Tom Sawyer definitely has an underlying commentary.
I definetly agree with Sam in that the mean girl phenomenon should not be linked with female empowerment. My understanding is that females are struggling with their inner desires/conflicts/what society wants of them and they cave to the ever so easy mean girl model that is given to them. Also, girls definetly are the own worst enemies, if they really did want to combat stereotypes and gain strength as a woman, I doubt stabbing each other in the back and emotional warfare is on the right path to feminine liberation.
I think much in the way that is shown in the movie, girls seem to take part in the "mean-ness" that is being perpetuated in the high school setting. Like Evan said, I came from a high school with various students with various incomes and this "mean-ness" was not apparent at all with the boys. The girls however, as it is commonly seen, are the ones who have mastered the art of the mean girl. You do not hear of "mean boys" so I believe it is strictly a female phenomenon. Teachers can absolutely perpetuate the cycle that the mean girls phenomenon has done. I know in my high school teachers gossiped as much if not more than the students, and would treat others poorly to assert their "power". I think that until we can find a way to stop this type of actions we will always have the "mean girl phenomenon" and it could or has already begun to spill into the realm of boys as well.
I think that seeing the "mean girl" phenomenon as a form of female empowerment is harmful to female empowerment in general. "Mean girls" reinforce the negative stereotype that women are petty, obsessed with beauty and social status, enjoy "cat fighting", and are inherently disloyal and superficial. None of these are positive qualities, and none of these apply across the entire gender, but dressing up "mean girls" as feminists or women fighting for equal power actually works to make feminism less seriously regarded.
Post a Comment