"Wildly Inappropriate" Episode of Dance Moms

I'm watching a re-run of last week's episode of Dance Moms, my new guilty pleasure, and the focus of the episode is on the girls wearing extra skimpy dance costumes and performing an extra sexy dance for a competition. Think the infamous "Single Ladies" dance that made headlines last year.

Now, there were two conflicting opinions. Most of the dance moms thought the costumes and routines were extremely inappropriate. Personally, I agree with them. Then the choreographer and one of the dance moms made the point that a lot of successful dance groups wear that stuff, and do dances like that. To them, that level of sexualization is just necessary to be competitive in the dance world. And sadly, they're right.

Let's get one thing straight: I support dance, and I support cheerleading. I support any physical activity that can (potentially) teach girls to value their bodies for what they do rather than what they look like, or what they can do for men. Studies have shown that, statistically, girls who participate in sports and physical activities are less likely to participate in risky behaviors such as drugs and underage drinking; casual, unprotected sex; gang activity; and eating disorders. Not to mention, the endorphins from practices and success of doing well can boost a girl's confidence and test scores. This is why the Women's Sports Foundation launched its GoGirlGo! initiative, which gives money to programs that help underprivileged, at-risk girls get active, giving them a better shot at a bright future. Dance and cheerleading can be very good for girls and young women.

That said, there is a sexualizing element that needs to be addressed. My sister's an all-star cheerleader, and I've seen what a lot of the successful squads wear: short, short skirts, cropped tops, and lots and lots of makeup. These aren't just young women wearing skimpy outfits and pageant-level amounts of makeup, I've seen seven year-olds wear stuff like that, and it's a little disturbing. The dance world has the same problem. It's not just a few gyms and studios pushing the limits, it's a widespread problem that's often rewarded with top titles and trophies. Now, on Dance Moms the girls did not place, and the sexual nature of their routine was probably the culprit. But that was a single competition in Lancaster, a conservative area, if they had done the same routine at the Phoenix competition where the choreographer got the idea to do a steamy number, they might have won.

What message are we sending these girls when the teams when sexy equals success for so many teams?

I do understand that revealing uniforms make it easier to move. As a young woman, I get that girls probably get a boost of confidence from feeling sexy in those outfits. That is, the girls who have the "typical" cheerleader/dancer body (skinny). What about the girls who, despite the exercise they get from practices, aren't as skinny and don't feel comfortable, forget sexy, having to reveal so much of their bodies? Skimpy cheerleading uniforms may make some girls feel alienated from the sport because of their bodies. If being sexy is seen as a par for the course, a requirement for success in competition, girls who are unwilling to dance and dress in a suggestive nature might feel alienated as well. In fact, there was a six year-old girl who was kicked off her squad, not because she said anything, but because her mom expressed concern over a cheer where girls chant about shaking their booties.

Abby Miller, the owner of the dance studio in Dance Moms, does not take kindly to parents expressing concerns over their kids' dancing. She says that when a parent opens their mouth, they ruin their child. And yes, that is sometimes true. Doing theater in high school, the director made it clear that we were to ignore any notes our parents gave us about the performance. Overly involved parents have the potential to undo what is taught in the gym or studio. However, in this case, parents should be outspoken when they feel that something their daughters are being made to wear or do might be too sexual. It's a parent's responsibility to protect their daughter from early sexualization and exploitation.

This isn't about young women choosing to be sexy and exploring their sexualities. This is about girls having no choice but to be sexy, not realizing the implications of their actions. These girls are at risk of growing up with a manufactured sexuality, influenced by their dance moves and how they're dressed for competition, rather than an authentic one. The competitive environment can be toxic for the girls' sexualities and sense of self, overemphasizing the importance of being sexy in order to be competitive with other girls, not to mention the importance of being skinny enough to look good in belly-bearing tops and tiny skirts. Now, I'm not saying that it has this impact on all girls who compete, and it's certainly something that needs to be studied, but it really appears to magnify a lot of toxic cultural ideals.

So what can be done? Sadly, I don't have a fool-proof plan. The problem is that all-star cheerleading and competitive dance isn't exactly centralized. It seems as though every competition has its own rules and judging criteria, with lots of overlap but nothing established as a universal rule. The Varsity corporation does run a large portion of it, but even then, there is no one ruling body regulating the competition circuit, so there's no one office to write to in order to get judges to crack down on vulgarity or to implement rules regarding cheer uniforms and costumes. And of course, if skimpy costumes were banned or suddenly very much frowned upon, that means gyms have to get new uniforms, which may not be a problem for the rich, expensive gyms that frequently change their uniforms anyway, but might be an issue for lower income gyms that recycle their uniforms and can't afford to buy new ones to adapt to the rule change, putting them at even more of a disadvantage in competition. Still, change can come from the top down, if successful cheer gyms and dance studios can be persuaded to lead by example and wear uniforms with more coverage, at least for the younger squads.

I think the world of cheerleading and dance can be just as good, if not better, sans the skimpy outfits and suggestive dance moves that, by most people's standards, are not appropriate for the younger age groups. After all, the focus of cheerleading and dance should be what people's bodies can do, not what they look like.

Cross-Dressing for Prom and Graduation

It's April, and for many high school kids, that means prom and graduation are just around the corner! This also means that every year, preceding those events, is a small slew of articles about girls wanting to wear tuxes to prom, and pants to graduation, in schools that forbid them from wearing anything other than skirts and dresses. When I first started seeing these articles, I was shocked that schools in this country still have such rigid gender roles written into their policies. So, it's time to counter a lot of the arguments for these ridiculous and outdated rules, and write in support of these young women who dare to break the mold.

Argument 1: Students need order! If cross-dressing is allowed, all hell will break loose and guys will start coming to these events in dresses just to make a mockery of the school, and there will be no way to stop them!

Reality: I'd like to know of one school where this was an issue. Really, my guess is it's pretty easy to tell who's cross dressing because of gender identity, and who is doing it as a joke. And most (responsible) parents are heavily involved in the preparation for these events, including overseeing exactly what their kids are wearing. You mean to tell me a mom is going to shell out all that money just so her son can wear a dress to prom as a joke? Or that a dad would actually let his son walk across the graduation stage in a dress just for the fun of it. Nope, not likely. In fact, in parts of this country where these gendered policies exist, I'm willing to bet that most parents of transgendered teenagers wouldn't let them cross-dress for these events either.

Chances are, if these dress codes were changed to allow for trans students to express their gender identities (if they so choose) at these events, little would change. The vast majority of guys would still wear masculine clothing, and the majority of girls would wear skirts and dresses, with a few of them wearing nice slacks and blouses for graduation if they don't have the time or money to buy a new outfit for the ceremony.

Argument 2: These schools just want girls to look nice! What, should we really allow these young ladies to wear JEANS to graduation?

Reality: Wearing pants does not mean wearing jeans or dressing casually for girls anymore than it does for guys. If girls wore pants to graduation, they would still be nice pants, khakis or slacks, and not ripped jeans like the people perpetuating this argument seem to believe (or want others to envision). Looking nice shouldn't mean looking feminine.

Argument 3: It's tradition!

Reality: Well that may be, but just because something has been done for decades doesn't mean it's okay. Our culture - fuck, our world - has had many sexist, racist, and downright brutal traditions for centuries, and sadly, many still exist (think segregated proms). It's still tradition for a woman to be handed off from her father to her husband at her wedding, symbolizing the transfer of property - tradition? Of course. Sexist? You bet. We need to stop perpetuating sexism, racism, and heteronormativity under the guise of tradition - some traditions need to be done away with.

We need to start implementing policies that acknowledge transgender students, allowing them to express their gender the same way cisgender students have been able to do for centuries. Forcing them to dress not in accordance with their gender identity and ignoring their needs in school policies only allows them to continue to be marginalized and invisible. So this year, when a news article pops up about a girl who may not be allowed to attend prom because she feels more comfortable in a tux, be sure to show your support for her!

On Covering Up

In an episode of 18 Kids and Counting - or was that 17 Kids? I forget - anyway, on an episode of the Duggars' TV show, Michelle Duggar preached the importance of women covering up and keeping her boys from seeing scantily clad women. In another episode, when the kids did get to watch TV, one of the kids felt the need to cover up the cleavage of a woman on the screen. Why? Because men shouldn't be tempted, and it's women's job to prevent such temptation.

To put it simply, men expecting women to cover up just so they don't see thigh and chest skin is just as problematic as men expecting women to wear skimpy clothing so they DO see skin. In both cases, women are expected to dress in accordance with what men want, rather than what they want.

I'm not opposed to skimpy clothing, or more modest apparel, but I do advocate that women choose the way they want to wear based on their own morals and beliefs, rather than cater to those of men. For example, while I am content with wearing shorts and tank tops in the summer when it's warm and I want to stay as cool as possible outside, after my experiences with rape and sexual assault I have thought of adopting a more modest way of dressing just as a way to avoid rape in the future. I know it's silly, because I was hardly scantily clad when the events took place, but sometimes I feel desperate for a way to feel safe again. Other women view sexy clothing as a means of empowerment. Whether either way of dressing is empowering, or which is more empowering than the other, is a topic of much debate, and I'm not going to get into it now.

This expectation to cover up still regards women as sex objects, only in this case they're regarded as inherently sexual and need to de-sexualize themselves so men don't get turned on. It puts the burden of preventing "bad" things on women, treating them like the moral gatekeepers of all things sexual. It also assumes that men can't control themselves - Michelle Duggar said boys need to learn self-control, and the only way this can happen is if women don't tempt them. Well that's silly, anyone can learn self-control without temptation, that's like learning healthy eating habits in an environment free of any bad foods. True self-control is being able to actually see cleavage without acting on the arousal that may come with it. But I guess that's too hard, men don't want the work of learning such willpower, they'd rather leave all that stuff up to women.

If anything, this should be an insult to men - I remember being really insulted when my school decided that the only way to prevent obesity was to remove junk food from the school cafeteria. We couldn't be trusted access to soda and chocolate, so they had to take it out of our hands. I, being a responsible consumer for the most part, and nowhere near in danger of becoming obese, was outraged. I didn't care if I didn't need soda, on the days where I felt myself about to doze off in class, being able to guzzle down a Coke to keep me awake for the rest of the day helped a lot.

This "boys will be boys" attitude, or the idea that men can't handle even the sight of cleavage without losing control, is a huge aspect of rape culture. With this discourse, we can easily dismiss most rape cases by saying "well, she tempted him, what did she expect?" It supports the "rape schedule," or set of safety rules imposed on women, putting the burden of rape prevention on them rather than teach men not to rape. We hold women accountable for what happens to them, rather than hold men accountable for what they do to women. Of course, men must love this system, they can do almost anything to women as long as they can pin it on the woman for somehow "asking for it." Now you must see why rape victims feel compelled to cover up, so they don't "attract" any more violence, and if they do, they're less likely to be blamed for what happened.