Shannon Kelley

Shannon Kelley
Location
Santa Barbara, California, USA
Birthday
June 11
Company
self-employed
Bio
Shannon Kelley and her mother Barbara Kelley are both journalists, and have just written a book called "Undecided". Together. (...Right??) This blog is a taste of what you'll find in "Undecided", a book about choice overload, analysis paralysis, grass is greener syndrome, longing for the road not traveled, and how the success of the women’s movement has left women stumped in the face of limitless options — and how to get over it. The book comes out on May 3: if you like what you're reading here, get the book here: http://www.amazon.com/Undecided-Endless-Perfect-Career-Life-Thats/dp/1580053416. And subscribe to our blog here: http://undecidedthebook.wordpress.com/

MY RECENT POSTS

Shannon Kelley's Links

Salon.com
Editor’s Pick
SEPTEMBER 1, 2011 11:37AM

“Too Pretty To Do Homework?”

Rate: 18 Flag

I almost choked on my Cheerios Wednesday morning when I read about an incomprehensibly sexist tee-shirt that JCPenney had attempted to market to tweener girls. The shirt not-s0-subtly trumpeted the retro stereotype that girls can be smart or they can be pretty.  But never both. Its slogan, emblazoned front and center in colorful girly writing, was this:  “I’m Too Pretty to Do Homework, So My Brother Has to Do it For Me.”

Color me outraged. The design, if you can call it that, featured hearts, flowers and a couple of easy math problems — one of them left undone.

The good news is that thanks to a fast and furious barrage from the twitterverse, JCPenney pulled the shirt off the market and, in fact, apologized. (As an aside, JCPenney has another tweener shirt still on the market.  This one pimps a girl’s best subjects as boys, shopping, music and dancing.)

But the bad news is that they ever came up with any of this backlash-y nonsense in the first place: As if the “too pretty to do homework”shirt itself weren’t enough to set girls back a generation or two, take a gander at the ad copy: “Who has time for homework when there’s a new Justin Bieber album out? She’ll love this tee that’s just as cute and sassy as she is.”

Cute?  Sassy?  Justin Beiber?

The mind boggles and the heart sinks. It doesn’t take a degree in psychology to recognize that when girls are told that they’re no good at something — or that there’s still this false dichotomy between beauty and brains — it often becomes self-fulfilling prophecy. And so we have to wonder: is this kind of messaging one reason why — as Slate writer Shankar Vedantam noted a few months back:

Less than one in five professors of science and math at top research universities in the United States is a woman. The gender distribution of engineers at top Silicon Valley companies is similar to the gender distribution of the audience at your average strip club.

Strip club? Ouch.

Obviously, it’s all a bit more complicated than the outdated message that there’s beauty or there’s brains, and never the twain shall meet. But you have to wonder if these kinds of messages, subtle or otherwise, that we send to little girls often set the stage for deeper obstacles that keep women out of the game when it comes to math and science. Slate’s Vedantam went on to cite a study by Amherst psychologists who found that college women did better in math and science — and felt more comfortable in their abilities — when their professors were also female.

You don’t have to be a science geek to know where this is headed: the subtle discrimination that often impacts our choices.  And part of that discrimination — let’s just call it sexism — may have to do with whether or not we have role modes who look like us and who make us feel that we belong.

An earlier study likewise suggested that women avoid math and science, not because they lack the aptitude, but because they don’t feel welcome. Call it identity threat: women may avoid situations — like math or engineering — when they feel outnumbered. Researchers Mary Murphy, Claude Steele and James Gross found that when women math, science and engineering undergrads simply watched a video that pitched a fictional conference where men outnumbered women, the women showed the physical signs of threat — faster heart rates and sweating — and reported a lower sense of belonging, and less desire to participate in the conference at all. The researchers also found that the women who watched the gender unbalanced video were more vigilant of their surroundings overall.

The point? Sometimes it’s the threat, as much as the reality, that does us in. Which could be why we often end up side-stepping opportunities instead of marching right in, loaded for bear. It’s kind of a chicken-or-egg scenario:  Women who want to succeed — in math, science or the corporate boardroom — are more likely to do so if there are other women before them to pave the way. But how do those women get there?

Back to JCPenney and their sexist tee-shirt, the first step may be making sure young girls know that they don’t have to chose between beauty and brains — or Justin Beiber and schoolwork.  And that, when it comes to their homework, they can do as well as their brothers any day.

Even when it’s math.


Tagged: Amherst, claude steele, james gross, JCPenney, Justin Beiber, mary murphy, Shankar Vedantam

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Science has proven that male and female brains are different. (Duh, just ask anyone who is married, well, any hetero that is married.) So one would expect a few more male engineers than female engineers, still..........

Having said that, I do tire of the crap put out as merchandise by big box corporate America. The moron who was the buyer for this shirt should be fired----but, will probably end up with a promotion.
rwntj is right about crap, women and men being ... different. that's just kind of a trashy shirt almost though. not quite, but very close. i have a daughter who is brilliant quantitatively, and God gave her that mind, so why interfere with that, if i hope she is wife and mother someday too, as that seems part of the natural order as well. it would help a lot if people didn't make assumptions that if you take care of children, your mind atrophied somehow, instead of seeing that as fundamentally part of the natural order.
Thanks for speaking out Shannon. I think you may be interested in this piece from This American Life. It's incredibly sad and pull-out-your-hair maddening. http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/326/quiz-show?act=3
I was shocked recently to see some crass sexist slogans on the walls of the women's bathroom, I think it was at Village Inn, put up by the company. It compared a man's worth, size and wallet. I was sad for the women who read this stuff all the time and keep thinking that's funny, and sadder still for the men who have to live with that. I can't imagine what crap was put up in the men's room, but it probably wasn't pretty.
socialization or evolutionary psychology? you seem to be very well read on the former but rather unaware of all the new research into the latter. I suggest, maybe dont try to push the river. I feel people are overreacting to the tshirt. its a joke. amazing we can get jcpenney to yank a tshirt out of outrage but we cant get our country to stop 4 overseas wars. huh, whats up with that.
Very well put; reminds me of that Barbie doll that said, "Math is hard." When a prankster switched the voice boxes with a GI Joe, Mattel woke up and took it off the market.

Sociologist Peggy Orenstein has written about the manner in which girls around the eighth grade learn to see themselves as sex objects just as boys are learning to see themselves as success objects. The shift from confident girls begins, and even teachers who view themselves as gender neutral have been found to unconsciously call on boys far more often than girls in math and science. Thank you for an insightful essay reminding us of how far we still have to go.
This sort of mentality helps the global capitalist economy: it primes American girls into becoming uber-consumers of frivolous crap like shoes, makeup, dresses, hair products, etc...so that they can constantly be obsessed with how men value them (based on appearance) rather than value themselves based on their own internal sense of sense-worth, accomplishment, inner-strength and dignity.

I have a niece who is totally buying into all of this girly stuff and it irks me. She thinks getting good grades is stupid, even though she has the brainpower to do it. She's a white American.

On the other hand, I coach a middle school, korean-American debate team. 1/2 of the team are girls of the same age as my niece. Of equal intelligence, but greater drive and family involvement. They spend far less time on their nails and reading teeny-bopper mags, and caring about their looks, than they do focusing on being prim, proper and "making the grade."

Looking decent is fine. It shows self respect. But trying to be a glam model and putting it over hard work is stupid. Work must always come first. Work work work work work.
Thanks for bringing more attention to this shameful act by a retailer that makes a great deal of money selling clothes to girls and women.

Although we should not be surprised such a shirt was manufactured, given that we live in an age of "Keeping Up With the Kardashians" and "The Real Housewives of (Brazilian Wax?)."

Thanks for this great piece.
Cripe ALMIGHTY.@#$!

(what are the forces that keep holding society back?).

Thanks for this.
When I first heard about it, I wasn't offended. But I had only heard about the first half of the slogan, "Too pretty to do homework," which is the kind of remark my A student, 20-year-old daughter sometimes says as a joke. When I finally heard about the second half, I was appalled because it was reinforcing stereotypes that I'd hoped were being buried.

There was a Nivea ad that was pulled a couple weeks ago - I mentioned it in one of my posts - that pictured a well-dressed African-American man throwing an Afro'd head. I read today about a company with a print ad that seems to make light of domestic violence. I shake my head and wonder: Is anyone minding the store? Aren't there any adults in management who can look at something with just a dab of critical thought and say, Hmm, maybe we have a problem here?
Actually, the problem with this t-shirt is that it doesn't allow enough skin to show. They should issue it with a nice V-neck.
This is astounding. Great piece!!
I know that men and women are different, in both mentality and also in certain physical ways (obviously.) That said, how much of these 'differences' in men and women are truly genetic based on gender versus century upon century of social reinforcement?

I raised my daughter to believe and to know that she can do anything she wants and sets her mind to do. While she has pretty much turned her nose up at book learning, she is one hell of an artist. As long as she's doing what she likes to do, then I'm totally okay with that.

The whole mythos surrounding men and women and their differences, for me, was solved and disproved when Billie Jean King whipped Bobby Riggs' ass in three straight sets of tennis. To Mr. Riggs' credit, he admitted defeat, took it graciously and shook hands. It was his big mouth, though that led up to that fateful event, which I watched live.

It was his contention that any man, in good health and skilled in a sport, could beat any woman in that sport -- it was simple natural law, as far as he was concerned. His statements came at a time when ERA was still a hot topic in the news (for those that don't remember this time, ERA stands for the Equal Rights Amendment, which would have legally granted in an amendment to the Constitution that granted women all the same legal rights specifically enumerated in the Constitution -- essentially making certain the phrase "all men are created equal" was legally binding and granted for women as well. There's a bit more to it than that, but that was the framework within which this challenge was issued.)

And in all that time, we have seen women push further into more and more roles that were (and some folks think still are) a man's world only. But makeup, cosmetics, beauty aids, fashion clothing, shoes, and jewelry thrive on this entire concept of women being pretty sexually attractive objects of a man's world.

In short, not that much has changed since that day Billie Jean King opened a can of Whup Ass on Bobby Riggs. That was 1973. It saddens me to no end to lived through the beginnings of these changes to see so little actually accomplished.

It reminds me of that phrase: For evil to win, all that is required is that good men do nothing. There's been a whole lot of nothing going on for well over nearly 40 years. If the Arab Spring is any indicator, 40 years is about the limit of what most oppressions will tolerate before they revolt. Then again, oppression can oftentimes last much longer when the oppressed have come to believe that such is their lot in life.

Rise up, ladies, revolt! I ask only this: Be kind to the men of the world, show mercy. Simply turning the tables will avail no-one of any progress. It would only be a role reversal. We must all learn that the only differences we have are the ones we should revel in and appreciate. It's our differences, melded with our common interests that make us stronger.

-r-
VZN definitely has a point about being unable to stop the wars.

However, that "too pretty to do homework" tee-shirt warranted a strong reaction--how nauseating! The not too subtle subtext for girls is "You're not valued for your brains." Or maybe it's "We're threatened by women who pursue intellect over beauty." Evidently the price of liberation for women is also eternal vigilance.

And like Cranky Cuss, I wonder if there's any body left in corporate America with any powers of critical thinking.

rated
The domestic violence article that Crankie Cuss referenced is actually deeper than one photo shoot. In this case it was a star from Glee pantomiming being abused, but it "was all about art". This article, http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/beauty/glee-star-latest-fashion-victim-in-offensive-shoot-black-and-blue-is-not-the-new-black-2539137/ goes on to say that it is a current trend in fashion to use photo shoots portraying violence against women in all forms to sell products.

I just don't get it.
Thanks for this essay.

I've written several times about engineering education and am in awe of anyone who can handle that kind of information -- as a writer, I'm so not a STEM kind of girl. But as a feminist I want to vomit every time (that would be hourly) I see and hear the ways women and girls are told to shut up, be skinny, be pretty and get/keep a man. It's grotesque and stops smart girls in their tracks because we all want to be loved -- and we want to be our strong, smart kick-ass selves.

I was very, very lucky in attending an all-girl private school Grades 4-9 and all-girl camp ages 8-16. Boys' sense of entitlement, when I started attending a co-ed high school, was a just a bad joke to me, not something truly scary. Girls need to know their power and get used to it.
And at Nordie's the hot new item is the "Mommy's Little Pole Dancer" tee in "not going back to school" fall colors!
the tshirt seemed to me to embody postmodern IRONY. is everyone irony-challenged these days? maybe the writer of the shirt was contemplating the whole historic span/grand sweep of postmodernism and feminist theory and still writing, "Im too pretty to do my homework". heck, I have a sig.other who doesnt want to do housework because she feels the same way. and hard-core feminists who dont want to do laundry or clean a house because they're too intellectual or accomplished to do that.... is that highly parallel & at least as much an outrage? hmmm I guess not. :p
feminist t-shirt: "I'm too smart to do housework. I get my husband to do that".
Tempest in a teapot. Anyone who watches FOX News knows that it's perfectly possible to be not only pretty, but gorgeous, and smart.

However, if an antidote is needed, how about a shirt that proclaims, "Pelosi, Wasserman-Schultz, Sheila Jackson L., and (saving the best for last) Maxine Waters are living proof that it's possible to be both ugly and stupid.
What I am amazed about is that many agree with the pulling of this shirt yet argue that it is ok for a singer saying f... our solders or rape that young thing, saying it is considered free speach. Don't even say it is not the same as children listen to these songs more then any of you do, if you allow one thing for free speach you must not allow any other to be banned just because it is the bandwagon you all want to jump on today.

Yes it is not right for this shirt to even be made but in the extreem liberal United States we have become you can not pick and chose what is good and bad on a case by case basis.

All that is said about the mind set of this group or this gender is all nonsense, what matters is what the majority of people in this great country decide is in the best interest of the people of the country, you remember that is the way this country was founded, on the belief that the majority decides the course, not the few not the federal government.
it's as if there's a not so subtle movement to push women backwards. we made all these gains and yet, YET still there is crap like this to fill the heads of girls, reaffirming the worst in them: laziness, noncompetitiveness, just marry well and settle that cute little ass down as one's primary goal in life.

Of course that shirt could have been reworded and marketed to boys, but we'd never say that to a boy, would we?

we'd prefer it if American women were idiots. and that's a damned shame!

good for you!
The mind boggles and the heart sinks, indeed. I am so filled with hatred for the word 'sassy'.
Gordon Osmond wrote:

However, if an antidote is needed, how about a shirt that proclaims, "Pelosi, Wasserman-Schultz, Sheila Jackson L., and (saving the best for last) Maxine Waters are living proof that it's possible to be both ugly and stupid.

Classy, Gordon. And for the record, you left off the closing quotation marks.
Whoever in the comment thread was wondering what's happened to our sense of irony I would point out that irony is an adult taste. This T-shirt was marketed for impressionable girls. I would expect even Gordon Osmond to understand the distinction.
I've never been a traditional female even though I attained womanhood during the 1960's. Mot of my life my family and friends have referred to me as being "the Smart Ass." I tired to raise my beautiful daughters to be an individual rather than a chick. My youngest went through private school, a private school without female science teachers, harboring the desire to study math/science. In college, one of the Seven Sisters, she decided to pursue her hidden dream of being a doctor after she had several awesome female professors who taught Calculus, Biology and neuroscience. Today she is knee deep in becoming a neuro-surgeon.
Why the long commentary? It is important for girls to see and have contact with women who excel in math and the sciences. In Russia, women doctors are the norm. In America, we still have people talking about whether guys are better at math and science than girls and the resultant conversation is insulting and tiresome! The media and its constant assault on values and perceptions do matter. Daddies who think their talented(math/science) little girls must grow-up and become wives and mothers miss the point. How many half-assed male scientists and doctors are in their positions merely because they are male? Far too many I am sure.
What society allows to be widely disseminated to the general public affects how we think! Think about all the fine minds that have been lost because of racism (blacks are not academically competitive, women's brains are not suited to math and or the sciences). It's enough to make you cry. In my case, I SCREAM a lot!