August 4, 2014

“Calling Your Daughter A Princess Is Sexist Now”

Whereas, say, preparing her to terminate an unwanted pregnancy — the punishment that no woman should ever have to face, whether or not her complicity in the condition was entirely consensual — is the height of empowerment. Daily Caller:

Have you ever called your daughter “princess” or, if you are a daughter, have you been called “princess” by anyone? If so, you are sexist scum.

This important pronouncement comes from Marquette University psychology professorsStephen Franzoi and Debra Oswald.

Franzoi and Oswald reported their findings in an article called “Experiencing Sexism and Young Women’s Body Esteem.” The obscure 2012 article and underlying research are finally seeing the light of day thanks to a website called Medium.

For their study, the two professors surveyed 86 female freshmen and their parents. They asked the research subjects to evaluate their own views concerning various female attributes and roles. Additionally, they asked the students assess their own personal appearance — weight, physical fitness, sexual attractiveness and the like.

The professors became deeply concerned, according to Medium, when they discovered that the women who held themselves in higher esteem tended to have fathers who practiced “benevolent sexism.”

What is benevolent sexism? It’s hard to define, Franzoi and Oswald say, but they swear they know it when they see it. One example, the professors said, is when a father provides economic support for his daughter “because she is his ‘special little princess.’”

Other problems the professors identify include encouraging daughters to wear cosmetics, chivalrously holding doors open or making little girls feel “special” in any way.

The problem with such treatment, they claim, is that it somehow suggests to females that they cannot provide full financial support for themselves. Females also can’t have high esteem in the absence of such treatment.

Or, to put this obfuscatory academic argot into plain English, “females are too stupid to be able to separate out compliments and the love from a family member from he harsh realities of the real world, which is why these liberal male professors have worked so hard to save the poor dearies.”

A reminder:  university “education” costs an absolute boatload, and this is the kind of thing those hired to demagogue at universities routinely teach.   Leading to women — who now make up the bulk of university enrollees — taking on enormous student loan debt, which leaves them in need of economic support from family (which typically isn’t just Daddy, but Mommy, too.  For which Mommy can be forgiven, as she — by virtue of marriage — is also the victim of sexism and patriarchal control).   Which is, of course, sexist.

Therefore:  we can conclude that liberal professors, by engaging women in classes that cost way too much and leave these women students in horrific debt,  foster the conditions for sexism.  Because without the financial burden of this kind of education, Daddy’s li’l princess — not Mommy’s, because that’s just false consciousness — might not need financial help.

Too, women are incapable of establishing any kind of esteem — pride in their own accomplishments — without having first been treated “special” by doting parents.  Because, well, they’re very weak-minded, are these dainty little flowers.

Thankfully, though, some liberal male psychology professors have the fix for what ails them — namely, the fact of their being female.

– Which, whew!  Crisis averted!

 

 

Posted by Jeff G. @ 9:41am
26 comments | Trackback

Comments (26)

  1. I have two girls. I assure you, by the time they are out on their own, they will a) not have daddy issues b) be poised to take over the world. I’m teaching them to not be delicate flowers, how to delay gratification, how to be charitable, empathetic, and ingraining them a sense of personal responsibility that allows them to be able to deal with both success & failure (this is real self-confidence).

    No matter how many papers these cretins write about things they know nothing of, my girls will be awesome even though I call them princess all the time. And pumpkin-doodle, and sweetie, and a million other cute, pet names.

  2. Lindsey Graham has been referred to as “princess.”

    I’ve called President Obama a “cupcake.”

    If I refer to President Cupcake as President Princess is it still sexist? Or would it be racist?

  3. Blake – Yes.

  4. But of course, let’s not forget that those of us who have smart, successful daughters, our deploying of pet names notwithstanding, are in no way responsible for any of their success. After all, “we didn’t build that.

    And BTW, is my financial support of my son, who’s headed off to engineering school next week, also “benevolent sexism,” or is it malevolent, because he’s, well, a he?

  5. What about “The Artist Formerly Known As Princess”?

  6. I do not drink. My earliest memory (I was 2), my dad stopped at a gas station after church and told me I could get whatever I wanted. I wandered around and spotted a shiny silver can, which I thought was the prettiest drink I’d ever seen. My dad knelt down and gently took it from me, and said, “This isn’t for princesses, and that means this isn’t for you.” And then he got me a Coke.

    When I was older, I figured out what the silver can was, and, I swear, I have never had a single desire to drink, ever, because I remember that moment, and it isn’t who I am.

    My dad (and mom) taught me who I am.

    How is that destructive to my self-esteem?

  7. he got me a Coke

    So the nanny political left would additionally find him guilty as a diabetes mellitus-ist at the very least — regardless what life outcome may have taken place.

  8. It would be interesting to find out if dads are more likely to call their daughters “princess” if there is more than one daughter.

    I avoided getting names wrong by referring to my daughters as “kiddo.”

  9. Blake, I have 2 girls. Both get called princess from time to time along with many other nicknames.

    Here’s the funny part – I’m an anti-statist. I find the concept of royalty morally reprehensible. No person gets to lord over me, especially someone who just happened to win the mommy-daddy lottery.

    But that’s not what I mean when I say princess. When I call my daughters that, it’s to indicate they are valuable to me as princes & princesses were back in their days to their parents (I guess still since many unenlightened places still have them).

    My girls are close to me. Even my 12 year old still likes being around Daddy, and if I play my cards right, I’ll still be part of her life even as she starts driving & taking herself to the movies. Part of that revolves around calling her names that she associates with her father’s love for her (of course, this goes for my youngest too).

    These people want to take that away. I believe it’s deep rooted in their desire to have the state act the role of parent. When there’s less bond between parent & child, the child will seek out that bond elsewhere. It’s a natural thing. When you make it so impossible to bond with your child due to the threat of being called ‘sexist’ or ‘racist’ or whatever ‘ist’ they make up on the fly, the state can supplant you as a father figure.

    My girls? They aren’t going to be like that. And I think that’s why these people hate us so much and why they constantly look for reports like this to ‘validate’ why people who raise their children like I do aren’t ‘fit’ and hey, we need to take your kids from you because SCIENCE! or something.

  10. It is extraordinarily healthy for fathers to treat their daughters as princesses, even explicitly. In the mind of a little girl, a princess is beautiful and therefore loved and treasured, such that a gallant prince would risk everything to save her. When young, that prince is her father.

    Such girls grow up knowing their daddy loves them and therefore are much less likely to seek approval and “love” from the first scumbag who knows how to recognize vulnerable prey. They won’t give it up just to feel loved even when they’re not.

    Any vanity or over-concern with looks will come from her mother, who, if she models excessive anxiety over her appearance, will transmit that to her daughters. If mom treats her little girl like a self-propelled doll (see: pageants), that will mess her up.

    But dad calling her a princess? Luckiest girl on the planet.

    Provided he doesn’t also give her everything she asks for, simply because she’s got him wrapped around her little finger.

  11. dicentra, when I met my wife, one of the things that made her attractive to me was that she didn’t wear a stitch of makeup. Today, she’ll put on some mascara because her eyelashes have gone grey, but that’s it. I hope they follow suit.

    My eldest asked a boy she liked to a dance via a note. When we asked her what she’d do if he said “no”, her basic response was “his loss”. THAT is true self-confidence.

    As for buying them everything? Heh, my girls already understand things like “budgets” and “opportunity costs”. My eldest has an older iPod. Does she want a new one for her birthday next month? No, because what she has now is fine and if she gets a new one, she knows she’ll get less of anything else.

    And my girls aren’t lucky their dad loves them so much, their dad is lucky he has girls so worth loving. :)

  12. Did ol’ Tommy D’Alesandro tell his little girl she’s a princess?

    ‘Cause if he did, she for damn sure has come away with such an absolute self-understanding intact into her late “adulthood”.

  13. Academics are really running out of stuff to write about aren’t they.

  14. They have daddy issues, bgbear.

    I’m a grandma and I still call my father “daddy” because he is much more special to me than just a father.

    Oh, and he calls me “baby” and “honey” and “sweetheart” and a million other endearments.

  15. Leigh, my late father, when I was growing up, had some terms of endearment of the 4-letter kind for me.

    I was not a model citizen.

  16. IIRC in “Fathers Knows Best” Jim Anderson called the older daughter Betty “Princess” and the younger daughter Kathy “Kitten” . I don’t recall if son “Bud” had a real name other than “Bud”.

  17. Provided he doesn’t also give her everything she asks for, simply because she’s got him wrapped around her little finger.

    This latter part being the source for the old nugget of wisdom: “Never date a girl whose father calls her Princess; chances are she’s come to believe it.”

  18. “…with long phony nails, and a hair-do that rinses…”

  19. heh

    “. . . with fingernails that shine like justice, and a voice that is dark like tinted glass . . .”

  20. I’ve got a gal who is happier for being mine, knows it, and makes sure I know she knows. If her daddy had treated her like a princess when she was little, making her happier than she could’ve been without me would have been a much harder job.

  21. Leia Organa got called “princess” and she led a rebellion to take down a legitimately elected government.

  22. Blake, ah you were “that kid”. One of my brothers was one, as well.

  23. I agree with Jonathan Last and his The Case for the Empire.

  24. I haven’t been blessed with children, but I’ve called my Grand Niece ‘Kiddo’ [as in 'Beatrix Kiddo' of Kill Bill] ever since she knocked me over running when she was three. She loves the nickname [I always get a hug when I use it - makes my day].

  25. ====BEGIN LEFTIST CONTRADICTION ALERT====
    It is the practice among Sikhs to give their daughters names ending in “Kaur”

    Kaur literally means boy or son and is the title given to a prince. In Sikhism Kaur is generally interpreted to mean princess. Kaur is a suffix attached to the name of every female Sikh either at birth or upon rebirth, when initiated as Khalsa. Guru Gobind Singh gave Sikh women the name of Kaur as a statement of their independence and social status so that they would stand strong and regal beside men as their equal.


    Not only is the Guru’s opinion of “princess” diametrically opposed to this feminist interpretation, but most Sikhs are Persons Of Color.

    We need a ruling as to whether feminism trumps ethnicity or vice versa.
    ====END LEFTIST CONTRADICTION ALERT====

  26. We need a ruling as to whether feminism trumps ethnicity or vice versa.

    On a conjecture, I’d go with neither and put my money on feminine beauty for the win, crushing both with no more trouble than our darling has stomping a spider, once she puts her mind to it.

Leave a Reply