I am in the midst of studying pop culture for girls and reading a slew of books about girls, as my daughter will be heading to middle school in a year and I want to understand what her world is really like. As I've been raising her, I've also been a girl scout leader, school volunteer, children's religion teacher, etc. Over my daughter's first ten years of girlhood, I have been exasperated and angry at the endless images by media and pop culture and marketers that constantly tell girls that they are only acceptable, respectable, interesting, valued and admired if they are thin, they buy every slutty fashion trend, and they are able to attract the sexual desire of boys and men. I think girls are made into sex objects in our culture now more than ever.
The authors of this book jumped around a lot, contradicted themselves frequently, and made many factual errors in their presentation. I think it could have been a great book, but it fell short for these reasons. The book had enough errors to make me skeptical when I read information about books and pop culture and products with which I was not previously familiar.
For example, they slam American Girl. This company makes dolls and book characters that have real girl bodies, are not sexualized, overcome challenges, think for themselves, learn, grow, and are believable as strong, complex, smart, capable individuals. Yet the authors of this book whine about the fact that the company is also selling dolls and books to girls. Hello? Of course they sell stuff - that's why they are profitable. Have they read an American Girl series or two? Well I have read them all with my daughter over the past several years and my only disappointment has been that I did not have these books when I was a girl. Because of these historical novels that have young girls as central character, my daughter and her ten year old friends know more about American history than I knew when I graduated high school!
First the authors of Packaging Girlhood tell us that in the American Girl Molly series, Molly's mother is dead. Then they talk about the mother not being central in Molly's life until the end of the story, as a peacemaker. Excuse me, I thought you said she was dead? Had they actually read the Molly series, they would have known that during WWII, Molly's mother went to work full time in a Rosie the Riveter- type job to support the family and Molly was expected to be more independent. The authors complain about the AG characters being pretty. Girls do not identify with Molly because she is pretty (which she isn't especially) but because she is resourceful and brave and a good friend and smart. What is the problem?
One of the authors' complaints is that Samantha Parkington's (1904) female role model is a young woman idealized for being pretty, not for being accomplished. In fact, the young woman role model character was a suffragist, working toward winning the right of women to vote, and she had a positive and supportive influence on Samantha. The authors go on and on about the messages in the American Girl books are unercut because the girls are pretty. So what? Samantha stands up to a boy bully, teaches an immigrant to read and she speaks out about the realities of child labor in the factories. The authors of Packaging Girlhood are annoyed that she may have been pretty? I guess they forgot to read this series, also.
By the way, Addy claimed her freedom through the help of the Underground Railroad, not the "Freedom Trail."
Another quick example is that the authors refer to Bewitched and I Dream of Jeannie as seventies shows and then draw conclusions. Sorry, but these shows were popular in the sixties, before the womens liberation movement of the late sixties and into the seventies. The world and the lives of American women changed drastically between the early sixties and the seventies, so this was not a small error. They complain that Samantha Stevens wanted to keep her husband happy and wasn't a powerful character. Yikes, have they ever seen the show? The men are portrayed as buffoons and Samanatha makes her own choices and is the most powerful and intelligent character in the story line. I guess the authors are just annoyed that Samantha Stevens, a woman in the early sixties, chose to be a housewife.
I think the authors also missed the point of the movie, Mean Girls. Or, perhaps they skipped that and then wrote criticism of it like they did with the American Girl series of books.
This book needed a lot more work before it went to press. Because of that, the other research and conclusions were not entirely credible. With more effort in doing the research before casting judgments, this book would have been more beneficial. I have found Queen Bees & Wannabees and Odd Girl Out to be more credible and enlightening, though this book made some very interesting points about the barrage of harmful marketing schemes aimed at girls.