creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
Suzanne Fields
Suzanne Fields
25 May 2012
Hillary for Spare Tire

Hillary Clinton has gone through more reincarnations than Shirley MacLaine, who insists that when she was a … Read More.

18 May 2012
Romney Follows the Founding Fathers in Religious Tradition

What a country. In one corner, the president of the United States endorses same-sex marriage, evoking his … Read More.

11 May 2012
The Economy Is a Moral Issue

Rick Santorum endorses Mitt Romney, the man he once described as the "worst Republican in the country to … Read More.

Little Girls and Mad Men

Share Comment

Two little girls I know, age 6, showed up the other day at a public pool in Washington for a swim. They were excited by the prospect of escaping, if only for a little while, the heat pushing the thermometer close to 100.

Alas, they were wearing the only bathing suits they had: bikini bottoms, no tops. No go, they were told by the pool manager. There was a dress code, and no one was allowed to dress "inappropriately in a way that may offend others." Did I say these were 6-year-olds?

"Don't worry," their grandfather said. "They're boys."

The enforcer at the gate was not amused. Rule-enforcers, as a rule, rarely are.

The enforcer told the disappointed little girls they could wear their dresses in the pool, or she would find inflatable tops that children who can't swim wear so they're covered up "up there." The little girls knew how to swim, and they didn't want to ruin their dresses. They left in tears.

I've heard similar stories about rigid dress codes for small children at pools, and I've been surprised that many adults are so terrified of perverts and molesters that they applaud such harsh rules. I understand the fear, but have we gone nuts?

Our "liberated" culture, drenched in anything-goes sex (or "gender," for those who regard the very word as something as scary as a topless 6-year-old) now demands that we cast a dark shadow over genuine innocence in the name of protecting children. We must send innocence underground, robbing children of their incorruption.

I thought about all this the other night watching an episode of "Mad Men," the television drama enthralling millions, set in the long ago, the early 1960s. The ad men and their clients argue about how to sell Jantzen bathing suits. The ad men prescribe a "sexy" campaign for a "two piece" — not a bikini. The Jentzen folk want to maintain modesty; the ad men want to sell bathing suits.

We've changed a lot in six decades, and not always for the better. At its best, television drama holds up a mirror to a reality we can measure ourselves against, for better or worse.

The appeal of "Mad Men" is its drama-in-costume, entertaining us with retro-fashion trends. But it's also a reminder of how sexual mores operated in a more repressed time, before we made everything illicit explicit.

Few of us want to go back to the '50s, though the decade was better than its reputation, but "Mad Men" warns us not to be so smug about our hyperactive "progressive" world. Rebellions then were about the individual, not so much about society. We've come to think of the two decades following World War II as an "Age of Conformism," but passion in a sea of conformity required more self-reliance, more "gumption" than the oppressive political correctness that smothers us in the name of protecting us.

When one of the "girls" in the office of "Mad Men" submits to a brief sexual fling — a "quickie" — with her boss, they both regret it. They show their regret in different ways. He gives her money, in the form of a bonus, and she wrecks his office to punish him for giving her money, not respect. She has the last word, screaming an anachronism: "You're not a nice person." Her hurt feelings resonate today, when "hook-ups" reflect no discernment of what's even meant by "nice."

Critics speculate why "Mad Men" drew an estimated 3 million viewers to its opening episode this season. Some suggest that we like to feel superior (sexually liberated) and healthier (less booze and fewer cigarettes, more organic celery and fewer sweets, more exercise and the war against flab and blubber). Others applaud the way women are no longer the "second sex," having burst at last through the glass ceiling.

The writers are canny (as well as occasionally campy) when they intrude between the actors and the audience in life-parodies of the way we were. When the boyfriend of one of the "girls" in the office tells her that they should do "it" the moment they feel attracted to each other, "like they do in Sweden," she knows better. She understands that the problem in Utopia is that the "good life" quickly becomes the tyranny of a new norm.

And before you know it, 6-year old girl children must wear a bikini top or get out of the pool.

Suzanne Fields is a columnist with The Washington Times. Write to her at: sfields1000@aol.com. To find out more about Suzanne Fields and read her past columns, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Comments

4 Comments | Post Comment
I agree that we can be a little too overprotective of our children, but I came away from the story wondering what six-year-old girl (two of them no less) doesn't have a full bathing suit of some kind. Six is certainly old enough for them to learn that females wear tops. And instead of leading them off in tears, why didn't Grandpa just run to the nearest Target/Walmart/Kmart and buy a couple of swimsuits? My six-year-old niece wears a top and bottom when she swims, or a one piece. Not because her parents are afraid of predators. But because that's what girls out of diapers wear in public pools and beaches. That's life.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Jon
Fri Sep 3, 2010 4:34 PM
Ms. Fields, I might find all of your points valid if you were talking about 2-yr-olds or even 3-yr-olds. But 6?!?! I have a 7-yr-old daughter. It's been at least 2 years already since she and her peers have begun clearly expressing a well-defined sense of modesty about their bodies. It is NOT the result of parents being paranoid that there is a molester around every corner, it is the child's normal feelings. I'll never forget when I was about 11 (in the early 70s before there was much awareness of child molesters), seeing a younger girl being pressured into going topless in public because, her elders told her, she was too young to worry about it. It was painful to witness because it clear that she WAS worried about it, and they should have respected that.
Maybe those 2 girls in your story were in tears because they were already uncomfortable with going to the pool without a regular swimsuit. You only got the story from the grandfather's point of view. You assume that the pool staff, and our society of paranoid parents were the adults in the story who were insensitive to the girls' feelings, but it may have been the grandfather himself.
(And how was it they own only bikini bottoms? No store sells only the bottoms. I wonder if what that grandfather made them wear were really even swimsuit at all.)
Comment: #2
Posted by: cassandr
Sat Sep 4, 2010 4:26 AM
It's Grandpa's fault. My husband and I disagree on whether or not young girls should have to cover in public, but both of us understand at a public pool you go by the public rules. Grandpa should have stopped by the girls' house or a store and gotten them little t-shirts or tanks. If the girls had protested, then he could have explained about the courtesy of following the rules set for everyone when you use something that doesn't belong to you personally.
Comment: #3
Posted by: peggy
Sat Sep 4, 2010 6:59 AM
I support the public rule "enforcer", who was following policy that was most likely set for very good reasons. While the writer and grandfather might not have been alarmed with letting the girls going topless, the writer's assessment about the times having changed is spot on, in ways the writer didn't think about. The plain fact is that there ARE pedophiles who get their jollies out of observing kids without their tops and in this age of digital media, pictures of the girls can be posted online in seconds, being shared with others of their network. And who would the girls' family sue when this happens? The public pool. If the girls' family wants to continue to bathe without their tops, then go to a private pool to do so.

I also agree with the previous comments. 6 year olds were most likely feeling embarassment about not wearing the tops, about grandfather making it an issue, about not having tops at all, and about being called little boys. Go home and get a t-shirt so the girls can have fun instead of having someone 'make a point'.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Theresa
Sat Sep 4, 2010 8:20 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Suzanne Fields
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Mark Levy
Mark LevyUpdated 26 May 2012
Oliver North
Oliver NorthUpdated 25 May 2012
Linda Chavez
Linda ChavezUpdated 25 May 2012

8 Apr 2011 Crashing Into College

1 Jul 2011 Video Violence vs. Free Speech

2 Jan 2008 Out With the Old