Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Is Overachieving Bad for Girls?

By Courtney E. Martin, AlterNet. Posted November 16, 2006.


A new book praises hyper-achieving 'alpha girls.' But their behavior may be symptomatic of a larger trend in outwardly high-achieving and inwardly self-hating young women.
111606story

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

In Special Coverage

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Jim Hightower, Raising Hell
Jonathan Rowe

Democracy and Elections:
Are Feds Trying to Aid Republican Candidate's Election?
Tim Kalich

DrugReporter:
A Cultural History of the Magic Mushroom
Lux

Election 2008:
The Real Elitist: Video of McCain's Collection of Mansions Reveal He's Not Your Average Joe
Steven Greenhouse

Environment:
Republicans Have Handed Democrats a Winning Election Issue
David Morris

ForeignPolicy:
Blocking a Gazan's Path to an Education
Fidaa Abed

Health and Wellness:
The Misshapen Mind: How the Brain's Haphazard Evolution Left Us with Self-Destructive Instincts
Sasha Abramsky

Hurricane Katrina:
From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Not Accomplished
Amy Goodman

Immigration:
Medical Neglect in Immigrant Prisons Reveals America at Its Worst
Kyle Hussein de Beausset

Media and Technology:
What's Going on with the Media's Ballooning Coverage of Celebrity Babies?
Meredith Blake

Movie Mix:
Protest over Use of the Word 'Retard' in Stiller's 'Tropic Thunder' Misses the Target
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Obama Should Pick Hillary
Lanny Davis

Rights and Liberties:
Stop the Execution: Jeff Wood Faces Death Tomorrow for a Murder He Didn't Commit
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
Catching the Wrong John: When Are the Media Going to Talk about John McCain's Infidelity?
Drew Westen

War on Iraq:
How Many More Iraqis Can You Throw Behind Bars Without Trial?
Fatih Abdulsalam

Water:
What If Your Tap Water Is Not Safe To Drink?
Elizabeth Royte

More stories by Courtney E. Martin

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Dan Kindlon's new book, "Alpha Girls: Understanding the New American Girl and How She Is Changing the World," begins in the pastoral setting of a typical suburban New Jersey high school. The students read excerpts from "Reviving Ophelia," Mary Pipher's 1994 bestseller that painted a Modigliani-esque portrait of teenage girls -- depressed, anxiety-ridden, self-mutilating and self-loathing.

But 12 years after the publication of Pipher's book, Kindlon and the Jersey girls he is chatting with are convinced that American girls have had a real psychological makeover. Sarah, a sophomore, asks, "Who are the girls in this book? I mean, I feel sorry for them, but they're pretty much losers."

Kindlon holds up young women like Sarah -- girls with high GPAs, stacked extracurricular resumes and Ivy League dreams -- as the new Athena archetype. An alpha girl, he explains, is "a young woman who is destined to be a great leader. She is talented, highly motivated and self-confident." Through interviews and an impressively large survey (900 girls and boys across the United States and Canada), Kindlon concludes that alpha girls have an "emancipated psychology." They are no longer slowed down by empathy or emotionality, and are now free to pursue success with rabid dog competitiveness.

Unlike Kindlon, I don't see Sarah's dispassionate reaction towards those in pain or her peers' full throttle drive towards achievement as cause for celebration. What are we teaching young women about success and well-being? How has the baby-boomer legion of superwomen influenced the way a new generation of "alpha girls" envisions their worth in the world? How do we measure progress?

Kindlon and many others cheer at the idea of a nation of young women resembling Reese Witherspoon's character in the movie "Election": hard-working and high-strung, taking classrooms and boardrooms across America by storm. A flurry of feminist self-congratulation followed Jennifer Delanhunty Britz's March 23, 2006, New York Times op-ed, "To All the Girls I've Rejected," in which she admitted practicing affirmative action for boys at Kenyon College because there were simply too many qualified young women.

I am more inclined to sound a word of warning. Ambition that is not tempered by wisdom is dangerous. It can lead to a soul-sucking, endless search for a sense of satisfaction that will never come from blue ribbons or promotions. It can lead to loneliness, secrecy, disease. Contrary to our very American disposition, achievement, accumulation and public recognition are not tantamount to true progress.

During the course of researching my book, "Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters: The Frightening New Normalcy of Hating Your Body," I heard "Sarahs" across the country voice their suspicion that to be a success, they had to be infallible. Under this impossible pressure, many of them developed eating and anxiety disorders that they kept secret from even their closest friends. In a 2001 survey of Duke undergrads, the overwhelming concern of young women was to appear not just perfect, but effortlessly perfect.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: books, achievement, education, girls, teens

Courtney E. Martin is a writer, teacher and filmmaker living in Brooklyn. Her book, "Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters," will be published by Free Press in spring of 2007. You can read more about her work at www.courtneyemartin.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Wha???
Posted by: cowgrrrl on Nov 16, 2006 12:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Success = eating disorders?

(Banging head on desk.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wha??? Posted by: flairndip
» RE: Wha??? Posted by: willymack
» RE: Wha??? Posted by: Ian MacLeod
Unempathetic
Posted by: rsaxto on Nov 16, 2006 12:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a good piece about a bad book. Unempathetic men write crazy dumb books about bashed women. It's just another way of bashing women which only makes our woman-bashing society worse on women. The Taliban have their way of bashing women and the USA has its way of bashing women. If all of us of whatever sex would stop bashing women, then both women and men would be able to create a decent society without Bushie freaks and other narrowminded fools.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Unempathetic Posted by: RandomAction
» RE: Unempathetic Posted by: fork
» RE: Unempathetic Posted by: flairndip
» RE: Unempathetic Posted by: mkeeling@jam.rr.com
» RE: Unempathetic Posted by: Burton
Show me references...
Posted by: ahmlco on Nov 16, 2006 3:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Show me references, please. Especially those that back up the stated numbers.

The US, for example, leads the world in drugging our children for hundreds of different "disorders". But are the majority of those kids really sick, or is it just easier for a teacher to manage a drugged out zombie than a bright, active "problem child"?

Unfortunately, we have thousands of psychologists and sociologists who want to be the first to diagnose a major, previously hidden "problem" and slap a label on it, making their academic bones in the process. Once a convenient label exists, it's easier to find more and more people whom, to a greater or lesser degree, fit the pattern.

Then, with a huge body of potential patients, you have thousands more all invested in finding and producing "treatments" for those issues. And just let a major pharma company jump on the bandwagon.

Back when I was in school we too had tests and SATs and peer pressure and problems with school and parents. But were they, like those today, just problems we needed to deal with, or were we all suffering from acute-acheivement-anxiety-syndrome... and didn't even know it?

Excuse me, I need to go take a pill now...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Show me references... Posted by: zinnia
» RE: Show me references... Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Show me references... Posted by: Burton
» RE: Show me references... Posted by: pomes
» RE: Show me references... Posted by: purplelotus13
» yes: Show me references... Posted by: Burton
Hmm- the kitchen
Posted by: Intraspecto on Nov 16, 2006 3:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think all women belong in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant, making me my apple pie...

JUST KIDDING...I like a fiery woman more fun to conquer and make my very own..

Gotcha again...I really enjoy hyper-smart chicks

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hmm- the kitchen Posted by: liberalibrarian
» RE: Hmm- the kitchen Posted by: mkeeling@jam.rr.com
» RE: Hmm- the kitchen Posted by: Intraspecto
» Oooooh! Posted by: Burton
Just what we need
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Nov 16, 2006 4:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A bunch of alpha females to go with the alpha males...who will then breed little alpha-mutants.

When the do the sonogram, you can hear the little fella bragging about how he learned to walk and talk while still in the womb, and complaining that the doctor who will be delivering him attended an inferior medical school.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Just what we need Posted by: tweedster
» RE: Just what we need Posted by: Burton
fakeLeft recipe: keep the focus of politics on race & gender and away from healthcare & taxes
Posted by: not_the_preferred_nomenclature on Nov 16, 2006 4:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THAT'S the way the rich nonprofits and their rich benefactors like it! THAT'S how Alternet and the other fakeLeft nonprofits can continue to get those grant checks from the large nonprofits (who get funded by the upper class and plutocrats and megacorporations). Just keep the focus of american politics on gender and race and homosexuals, and that way the topic of raising taxes on the upper class and getting universal healthcare won't come up too often....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My Alpha Friend
Posted by: Urstrly on Nov 16, 2006 5:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In high school, my best friend was an Alpha, who couldn't bear a grade under 98. She was beautiful and kind, I might add, so it's not surprising she was head cheerleader and homecoming queen as well as valedictorian.

But in the midst of all this, she got pregnant by her long-time boyfriend (also a star) and her parents insisted she get an abortion. She went off to a top college in the fall and began to fall apart. Her mother's sorority rejected her (news about the abortion, I suspect). She got a BS and an RN but confessed to me that her mentor was disappointed in her performance. She married disasterously, became addicted to alcohol and prescription drugs, lost custody of her child. She married twice more and killed herself at 43. Her mother said it was a heart attack.

I still grieve for my friend, and I blame the church where she was a youth leader and her parents for placing such enormous expectations on her. We were taught that good girls didn't need birth control, so passion was a trap for her, as I suspect it is for all these Alpha girls. We ought to ask ourselves if we ask too much of them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Empathy a bad thing??
Posted by: ankhet on Nov 16, 2006 5:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"...no longer slowed down by empathy or emotionality, and are now free to pursue success with rabid dog competitiveness."

This is an improvement? No - it's just more masculinist-capitalist ideology - lack of empathy and competitiveness are already rampant and at the root of society's - and the planet's problems.

What we don't need is another batch of reptiles at the helm.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» pearl Posted by: pearl
Ambition that is not tempered by wisdom is dangerous.
Posted by: orwellwasn'tdreaming on Nov 16, 2006 5:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, but don't worry, that's only for women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ha, ha--women do well, things are bad. Women do badly, things are bad.
Posted by: medstudgeek on Nov 16, 2006 5:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We kept hearing about how girls are behind boys, and this was bad. Now when the girls are ahead, we talk about their emotional suffering. (Of course plenty of girls are still behind...but you see my point. Whatever happens to the girls, we find something bad. Meanwhile...boys go to jail and fall behind and nobody gives a damn.)

Look, a man who wants to succeed has to spend 60-hour workweeks (longer in many cases) sucking up to despicable, egomanaiacaly jerks. High school? Oh yeah, do lots of extracurricular activities and please your peers so you get elected head of this and that. The whole fucking system's rotten, and now that women are able to get to the top, they're seeing just how bad it is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What, there are still Yuppies?
Posted by: BeeGee on Nov 16, 2006 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I graduated high school in 1962 and went to a large urban university in the Northeastern US with lots of scholarship students from the Boston/NYC corridor. Many of my fellow women students were exactly as you describe here, even down to the eating disorders. We studied hard, built careers, Dressed For Success in the 80's and some eventually married and had children, some of which were Alpha Girls.

Then, as now, if a young American woman seeks material success there are two main ways to achieve it -- become an Alpha Girl and emulate male success-seeking behavior or cultivate one's appearance plus personality and seek to marry an Alpha male. The alternative is to seek other-than-material success, which occasionally results in writing a wildly successful book or producing something else that nets material success as a by-product.

While Alpha Girls might have a hard row to hoe, there are hordes of women trying to live with an abusive husband and three or four kids on 25K a year who would trade places any day.

Whether Alpha, Beta, or Gamma, the key is balance. If you're balanced enough to survive your initial forays into the world, wisdoom will follow. And if you have wisdom at 18, bless you for your good fortune.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Womyn have choices Posted by: Burton
» RE: Womyn have choices Posted by: morticia
» Not to mention Kevin Federline... Posted by: Durga_is_my_homey
» RE: Womyn have choices Posted by: Burton
Wait until 'little miss perfects' meet muslim fundamentalists
Posted by: Bobsays on Nov 16, 2006 5:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We already see the sparks flying with Condi Rice in charge. Now imagine an entire generation of US women up against the flood of the third world and the chaos of global politics.

Prizes, league tables, salary tables, googling, status-seeking titles, etc. etc. is a vortex that will just become more insane. I already know many friends who are caught in this. They have upteem degrees, publications, dollars, 'perfect' families, houses, cars, and the most rancid views you could imagine about the world around them that lets them down, populated by 'losers', whining minorities, lameos, burn-outs, therapy freeks, and the ever-dwindling capabilities of men. I hate to say it, but I think they are becoming fascists? Fema-fascists.

It is a poisonous creed because it seriously divides people, and places their value purely in objective indicators: income, material goods owned, achievements, where they live etc.

What is also interesting is what freeks these women start to become. At first, when they are young, they can look fit and fashionable. But as their feet peddle furiously under the water as they juggle all these achievements, they start to look more frazzled. That is when the nexus of middle age meets helmet hair, shoulder pads, gravely voices, sterile human relations, ever-sadder husbands or 'partners', and a whipping wind of shallow soullessness blasting through their monster homes.

God help the world we are creating with these women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fema-fascists? Posted by: Cathyblj
» RE: Fema-fascists? Posted by: Burton
» RE: Fema-fascists? Posted by: Bobsays
Success makes women hate themselves?
Posted by: nellie blogger on Nov 16, 2006 6:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good grief.

*sigh*

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Women's Issues: The ANC doesn't 'get' them either ...
Posted by: AdamSelene40 on Nov 16, 2006 6:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh well, ... another book to sell ...

Goddess! How I wish the AlterNet editors would either wise up, or give up on what they imagine Women's Issues to be.

And we wonder why mainstream Dems have retreated from 'Choice' and pretty much all other Women Issues that aren't also Children Issues.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Let's stick with the ANC ... Posted by: AdamSelene40
ANALYZING US TO DEATH
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Nov 16, 2006 6:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is female success automatically associated with various disorders? Where do you get your info? Are successful men just naturally drunks, with anger management problems? I don't think so. You're not at all convincing and your theory has no substance. The numbers of women in high places is growing and that frightens alot of people. I don't know why. I don't much care. Deal with it. Thank you, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ANALYZING US TO DEATH Posted by: tweedster
» RE: ANALYZING US TO DEATH Posted by: Annapurna1
» RE: ANALYZING US TO DEATH Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: ANALYZING US TO DEATH Posted by: Burton
Alternet strikes again!!
Posted by: JCR on Nov 16, 2006 6:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's so charming when Alternet writers take an offhanded swipe at men despite having no particular reason to do so. Ya know, like they've done in this fluff piece dressed up as journalism.

"It's true, my generation of women has broken records and taken names. Women now outnumber men on college campuses by at least 2 million. A recent report by the National Council for Education Statistics concludes that girls consistently outperform boys on reading and writing tests, and are more likely to have taken algebra II, AP/honors biology, and chemistry than their male peers. They are also more likely to participate in music, performing arts, belong to academic clubs, work on the school newspaper or yearbook, or hold office in student government."

We get it already - us men are nothing more than slack-jawed, blue collar fodder for the feminist changing of the guard. It would be refreshing to read an article that manages to discuss issues that confront "successful" women (i.e. those taking AP calculus, others need not consider themselves successful) and not denigrate men, many of whom are falling through the cracks, in the process. And all you "dummies" out there who haven't freed yourselves of "emotionality or empathy" and don't work on the school newspaper - just WTF is your major problem? Good show Alternet. Another piece of E-trash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No, son ... it's only you ... Posted by: AdamSelene40
» Sigh..Probably right. Posted by: ABetterFuture
» Cry me a river Posted by: lawstudent08
» Kwitcherbichin pert 2... Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Cry me a river Posted by: Burton
» RE: Cry me a river Posted by: timebomb734
» Tsk tsk: Cry me a river Posted by: Burton
Nervous, eating disorders have always been with us.
Posted by: harpy on Nov 16, 2006 6:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fact is, all the "disorders' have always been with us, they just weren't so well documented. Back in the "dark ages", women used to have their ribs removed to maintain a certain body image, and people openly ridiculed overweight women. Women were "nervous" or "crazy" and had all the insecurities and problems that we have now. Success comes with a price, but so does non-success. Believe me, it's a whole lot easier to deal with emotional problems and health problems when you have money in the bank. At least with money in the bank, you can go to the doctor, or you don't have to worry about whether or not they're going to turn your power off before the next tiny little minimum wage paycheck gets laid in your hand. What it gets down to is whether or not you have the fortitude within yourself to suck up your problems and face what's hitting you or cave. Everybody's gonna hit the wall many times in their lives - money, class, looks, religion, position, or fame have nothing to do with it. That's just life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

thank you
Posted by: hellofriends on Nov 16, 2006 7:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when i went to spain for the first time i remember seeing a bunch of people sitting in a courtyard, hanging out. it struck me profoundly that they were just sitting. just sitting! it was totally acceptable to just sit. they weren't playing with their cell phones or waiting for someone or hurrying from this place to that. this might have been a projection on my part, but no one seemed to be obsessed with how they were going to become famous or someday truly realize the super-special recognition they felt they so mystically deserved. i think this affected me so much because it seemed so different from the vibe i felt back home on my ivy campus, where so many people seemed so utterly driven that they couldn't see that maybe, in buddhist terms, the path IS the goal. thank you for this truly sane article which posits a very necessary question for our very driven country: where are we really driving ourselves, and why?

one issue i had with this article is that it mentions that females are twice as likely to develop anxiety disorders as males. this isn't entirely true, from what i know. it's likely the case that males suffer just as much from anxiety disorders but are less willing to report them and seek help for them because of stereotypically male standards of fear being effeminate. with this in mind i wouldn't be so quick as to limit this phenomenon of self-destructive and delusional ambition to women alone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bob, you scamp, you!!! Posted by: morticia
and the point is???
Posted by: xenacat on Nov 16, 2006 7:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, okay. So women are now unhappy because they overachieve. Sweet Jesus, please give us a break from this nonsense. I expect that different women will react individually to success and its stresses - just as men do. The premise of this article is insulting to all the well adjusted women out there who are mature enough to understand that life ain't just a bed of roses. It would be very refreshing to never, ever have to deal with another one of these articles that whine about a small group of women - ivy league educated young women. Attention Alternet editors: there are other groups of women out there that are important. No, not just mothers either...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: and the point is??? Posted by: Lyrren54
» RE: and the point is??? Posted by: xenacat
Author Needs An Alpha Female Ghost Writer
Posted by: zincb on Nov 16, 2006 7:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author states, "Here's the big "but": 7 million American girls and women have eating disorders. Panic disorders and depression are twice as likely in women and 75 percent of autoimmune illnesses affect women. This is not progress without pain."

I challenge the "obvious" conclusion that the author draws, that these problems are manifestations of recent female success.

These stats are no different than they were in the 50's, 60's, or 70's.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What the "F" Do You People Want???
Posted by: Kym525 on Nov 16, 2006 9:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Girls don't do well in math versus girls who kick ass in math. Cheerleaders versus geek girls. Fat girls versus skinny girls. Has anyone ever bothered to ask this new generation of young women what THEY want, what makes them happy with themselves? And if we do have a generation of successful young women, should we be downgrading them or sending out these "warnings" that they'll be unhappy (unless they're popping out mounds of kids - see the article on the "Quiverfull" movement).

Moreover, where the hell are the young girls of colour? Books like this always talk about caucasian women and leave the rest of us wondering "what about us?" By the way, I'm thinking about two rather ambitious, successful women of colour - Condoleeza Rice and Oprah Winfrey - I don't like Rice's politics and I'm not too crazy about Winfrey's show or magazine, but I do admire them for what they've accomplished. Oh wait people, neither are MARRIED. Both are dedicated CAREER women - and they've just GOT to be miserable without a man. But I guess when we're talking about women of colour, our lives don't matter so who cares what we do for good or ill?

The last time I checked feminism and all that a generation of older women fought for (and those of us who've taken up the mantel are still fighting for) was/is about CHOICE. How do we as thinking, rational human beings wish to conduct our lives. It seems that everyone else still thinks they know what's best (or not best) for women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rationalization, Diminuntion of Humanity is the problem
Posted by: lulugeez on Nov 16, 2006 9:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Martin's argument would be more helpful had she not confined the critique to one gender. We do have a problem here with the diminishment of the human qualities of empathy and emotionality. But as I see it, this crisis stems from the squeezing of Humanity from the human species, primarily because it falls outside of emerging engineering standards. Her concerns should not be restricted to girls or women. Like human-scale neighborhoods in any city, some of the friendlier human qualities can now be condemned as blight if they interfere with progress. The Taylorist imperative has gotten around to ordaining the reassignment of every living thing into one of two categories: consumable or consumer (here male and female amount to little more than the color choices offered in running shoes). Our whole species has been judged and sentenced to retooling for efficiency's sake. What Martin and others, who might like to re-legislate women back into the family, are overlooking, is that human behavior is a very wiggly thing--men and women never have fallen in line with strict gender-based rules and laws of comportment "We are what we are and we aint what we aint." This is precisely why gender ayatollahs have found it necessary to engrave commandments to keep these genii in their bottles. I appreciate Martin's concern about the radical redefinition of human worth that is being celebrated as progress rather than mourned as the canablization of the human spirit. However the problem does not arise from wayward, cold-hearted girls nor from their pushy mothers, but from the corporate colonization of our souls. lulugeez

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Boys face these problems too
Posted by: pomes on Nov 16, 2006 9:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mary Pipher's 1994 bestseller that painted a Modigliani-esque portrait of teenage girls -- depressed, anxiety-ridden, self-mutilating and self-loathing.

I hope everyone realizes taht this is a great description of teenage boys these days too. The only difference is, when girls come forward to get support for these issues, for depression, anxiety, eating disorders, etc.. they are treated in a supportive and nurturing way. When boys come froward with these issues, they are ridiculed and called weak, and "not a man.." So boys have just learned to shut up about it and suffer in silence. Just another part of growing up male in America.

I guess that's not always a bad thing, many boys find their own way out of the mess. They find a strong sense of identity and spirituality that will serve them well throughout life's hardships. But just as many end up not in a program like their female counterparts, but in the prison system.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» no they don't Posted by: yogurteater
Michele Weldon
Posted by: micheleweldon on Nov 16, 2006 10:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am an alpha girl who grew up to be an alpha woman. Most of my friends are as well. I do not have an eating disorder and I relish all of my successes past, present and future. I also ackowledge all of my mistakes and failures, learned from them, blaming no one else, but always trying harder on a different path. I got here with hard work and the kindness and deliberate strategizing offered from other women higher up who mentored and helped me along the way. So I give back to every woman I can and I don't believe we have to problematize the efforts of young women who embrace achievement. I work hard, raise three sons alone and have a tremendously satisfying romantic relationship. I am not perfect, I am not superwoman, I do not have it all, but I have enough. There are millions of us well-adjusted alpha women. Stop assigning pathology where it doesn't belong. It's Ok to be alpha and happy. It's Ok to encourage young women to achieve as much as they dream. I do it everyday for all my students.
Sorry, but I see this as a way to bury the lead-- a plug for her own book. Seen less cynically, I see it as opinion from another alpha woman who has her worldview colored by her own legitimate hard work on a difficult subject. She is correct in her findings, and they need to be out there, but she is off in her direct correlation between the two realities of success leads to disorders. Sometimes it just leads to happiness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Michele Weldon Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: Michele Weldon Posted by: hellofriends
» RE: Michele Weldon Posted by: hellofriends
» RE: Michele Weldon Posted by: purplelotus13
Materialism
Posted by: needlefoot on Nov 16, 2006 10:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It has been an axiom for far too long that materialism does not bring happiness or self-satisfaction - one we still tend to ignore in the light of all-consuming consumerism. I spent a number of years climbing up through the ranks in the company for which I worked and I did pretty well. By the time I retired I was making a pretty good salary for a woman. It certainly was enough to keep my head a ways above poverty, but not enough to consider myself even at the low end of the scale of wealth. I learned a lot and was fairly content as long as there was a challenge in the work for me. But, during the last 20 of those years, I volunteered in my community as a rape victim advocate and a community mediator. I did not get paid for the nights I was routed out of bed to meet with a woman who had been raped or for the evenings I ceded to a small room filled with disputing people. But when I look back on those years it is about those activities that I think the most. That is where I see my contribution to society. That is where I see my self-worth. In those activities, I see the best of who I am.

The "balance" that some of the commentators above have talked about is an important element of how we view ourselves in relation to society. We do need to challenge ourselves. We do need to earn enough money to be self-supporting. We do not need to turn ourselves into unthinking and unfeeling automatons for the sole benefit of amassing a fortune.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Critics here have simply misread
Posted by: alanapost on Nov 16, 2006 10:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why do so many people seem to think that the author of this piece is 1. picking on women, 2. picking on men, 3. reducing everything to gender... when she's writing a piece about a book praising the success of "alpha women"?

It's like everyone's thrown out where the writing's come from, as if it sprung out of nowhere. It's a god damn book review. Get some comprehension skills, internets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bravo Alan! Posted by: MAD
Comment on the review
Posted by: dkm on Nov 16, 2006 11:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The reason that so many people seem to think that the author of this piece is picking on women, men and reducing everything to gender is that her criticisms of the book are exactly that. She criticizes the book for praising alpha women because she thinks the alpha women are dysfunctional and something to be avoided. She thinks men are responsible for promulgating the alpha female ethic, and she divides roles according to gender. In other words, she disparages behavior in the alpha women that she regards as normal for men.

I wonder what her real agenda is since most of her criticisms seem to be off the point and very, very contrived. No where does she manage to show that eating disorders are unique to alpha women. Her comment that women are supposed to be effortlessly superior is her own, unsupported opinion. In general, her criticisms are off the mark and symptomatic of a failed alpha woman wannabe. I may be somewhat sensitive to this subject since my ex was similar, always a medium sized frog in a tiny puddle, a legend in her own mind, but when measured against real successful women, she was a miserable failure. I see the same syndrome in this reviewer's review.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

you missed the mark...
Posted by: Annapurna1 on Nov 16, 2006 11:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IMNSHO..the big problem with alpha girls is that it very clearly embraces what i like to call the "maggie thatcher" brand of feminism...according to this school.."gender equality" is a few alpha bitches sitting on the fascist power circles alongside their male confederates ..rather than fight against the patriarchy..these women endeavour to become the patriarchy themselves...

only a hard-core neocon would exhibit the kind of optimism kindlon attributes to these alpha-bitches..and thats exactly what they are ..neocons...those of us that dont fall into that category should be more worried about the fascist power circles themselves..even if there isnt a single male on them...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: you missed the mark... Posted by: mdruss42
umm.
Posted by: dearOread on Nov 16, 2006 11:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ugh, who wants to be management, though, if you just really like to "make computers work"? They have to do all of the people-wrangling and resource shuffling, so you're not going to get to do a whole lot of the hands-on fun stuff if that's your route.
I think this illustrates the point about success being subjective.....As long as you're happy with what you do and where you're at, I wouldn't say your job title really matters, IMHO.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mmmmmmmm Community Property!!!
Posted by: Landbaron on Nov 16, 2006 12:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Marriage might make a comeback for men!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Seriously?
Posted by: msalicat on Nov 16, 2006 12:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem with this article and this analysis in general is that it's sexist. In trying to be "Feminist" or whatever, what it does is highlight women's achievements, success oriented behavior and alleged overachievement/drive for perfection as gendered social ills. The problem with AMERICA is that people are so driven towards effortless perfection, that we ALL, male, female, transgendered, straight, queer, asexual PICK ANY IDENTITY, neglect crucial emotional needs and our inner lives end up underdeveloped. It has nothing to do with being a woman. What the article suggests is some sort of biological determinism being uprooted by women's drive towards the top. In other words, our kind, gentle natures aren't as evident or present as our intellectualism and competetiveness. We aren't as emotional or sensitive as we once were? HELLO? Wasn't the point of feminism to cast off such ridiculously antiquated notions of women? Was it all so we could ultimately pine for the era of the fair sex? COME ON. SERIOUSLY? The analysis is banal and transparent and does not belong on a website promoting progressive view points.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Typical Eurocentric Drivel
Posted by: Kym525 on Nov 16, 2006 12:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]