April 2013 Update | A federal judge this week ordered the Obama administration to end its opposition to over-the-counter Plan B. In response, White House press secretary Jay Carney reiterated the administration’s position.
• • •
February 2012 | President Obama’s daughters are just thirteen and ten, but the guy just can’t stop talking about the possibility they’ll be romantically inclined someday, and about how much that fact freaks him out.
Just yesterday, when he was visiting the Master Lock factory in Wisconsin, Obama joked that the company’s industrial “super locks” might “come in handy” for him as “the father of two girls who are soon to be in high school.” For now, he added, he’s “counting on the fact that when they go to school there are men with guns with them.”
Gross.
And this isn’t the only time he’s made that kind of joke.
Two years ago, at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, he told the Jonas Brothers that his daughters were “huge fans.” He then warned the singing group not to “get any ideas” because he controls an arsenal of predator drones.
Last year, speaking at a Tennessee high school’s commencement, he noted that the school’s principal’s daughter had chosen to go to a different school because she “was worried that the boys would be afraid to talk to her if her mom was lurking in the hallways.” Because of this, he said, he’d decided to announce that his “next job will be principal at Sasha and Malia’s high school — and then I’ll be president of their college.”
A few months later a reporter, noting that he’d given the girls a puppy when he first won the presidency, asked what he’d get them if he won re-election. He replied that he’d “be getting them a continuation of Secret Service so that when boys want to start dating them, they are going to be surrounded by men with guns.”
These jokes are freaking creepy. Set aside the fact that Obama’s predator drones are estimated to have killed more than a hundred innocent children. Set aside the fact that Obama was joking about three men aged seventeen, twenty, and twenty-two “getting ideas” about girls who were then eight and eleven years old. Set aside the inappropriateness of a father meddling in the romantic decisions of his college age kids. (And set aside as well the casual, ugly assertion that his daughters will be interested in, and only interested in, “boys.”)
The biggest problem with all these jokes is that at their core they’re not really jokes.
When the Obama administration overruled the FDA’s scientists and policymakers on expanding morning-after pill access for teenagers last December, he said he endorsed the decision “as the father of two daughters,” and claimed that “most parents” would agree with him. Though he claimed that the decision was based on the possibility of “a 10-year-old or an 11-year-old” being able to “buy a medication that potentially, if not used properly, could end up having an adverse effect … alongside bubble gum or batteries,” the fact is that drugstores are filled with over-the-counter medications far more dangerous than Plan B, any one of which any ten-year-old can buy without restriction.
What makes the morning-after pill different is that it allows teenage girls to take control of their own sexual decisions and those decisions’ consequences. The mentality that says that “most parents” would want to deprive their daughters of that agency is the mentality that assumes that most parents fantasize about being the gatekeeper of who their daughters talk to in high school and college. It’s a mentality that jokes about using violence and the threat of violence to keep your daughters from becoming sexually active.
These jokes aren’t benign. With them, the president is normalizing a patriarchal, sexist, adversarial take on parenthood — and on fathering daughters specifically. (It’s not an accident that Michelle Obama doesn’t make these jokes, or that she instead jokes approvingly about her daughters’ crushes on the Secret Service agents who protect them.)
If Obama’s children were sons, he wouldn’t be talking about using industrial super locks on them when they got to high school. He wouldn’t be musing about his plans to keep his kids from talking to girls when they got to college. He wouldn’t be threatening Selena Gomez with predator drones. He just wouldn’t.
Being the father of daughters is complicated. It can be difficult. But a father’s job is to help his daughter to develop a strong, healthy sense of her own desires and her own boundaries, and the confidence to express them. A father’s job is to teach his daughter that she can and should be brave, and fearless, and take risks. A father’s job is to let his daughter know that he’s got her back. A father’s job is to let her know that what she’s going through is normal, and appropriate, and isn’t going to be a barrier to him continuing to be there for her. His job is to make it clear that his desire to protect her and keep her safe doesn’t mean that she needs to sneak around behind his back, to make it clear that she doesn’t need to stay a child forever, that she can and should and must go out and explore the world for herself.
I suspect Obama is a pretty good dad. But his blind spot on this stuff is doing real harm to other people’s daughters, and quite possibly his own.
He should cut it the hell out.
studentactivism.net 
69 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 16, 2012 at 10:51 am
Metta
I appreciate your view. There is an alternative way to look at President Obama’s vigilance. There are, daily, stories of sexual predators out there, people who are our neighbors, friends, colleagues, priests, delivery men, etc., men who we think are not capable of sexually attacking young girls. I read President Obama’s quips not as jokes, but as reminders that, in addition to (the very limited) descriptors you list as a father’s job (in paragraph 14), another job is for fathers to protect their children. By showing them that he will protect them, he also provides them with confidence and trust. More fathers could take a page out of his book.~
February 16, 2012 at 10:59 am
Angus Johnston
You think he was really suggesting that the Jonas Brothers are sexual predators, Metta? Or that he feared his daughters being assaulted by boys they might talk to in their high school hallways?
Yes, a father’s job is to protect his children. But when it comes to their dating lives, you don’t protect them by trying to scare off any potential age-appropriate partner. You protect them by teaching them how to protect themselves, teaching them how to see the warning signs of trouble, and by letting them know that you’re in their corner, backing them up. You protect them by recognizing that a lot of the stuff that scares you is normal and appropriate and healthy.
Making your kids feel like they need to hide their social/sexual/romantic struggles from you, like they need to sneak around behind your back, like they need to pretend that they’re not going through the tough stuff they’re going through, all that is what makes it IMPOSSIBLE for you to protect them. All that is what leads your kids to find themselves in situations they can’t handle and to feel like they can’t call on you for help.
But you’re right that when I was talking about a father’s job in parenting daughters, I only talked about a small slice of it. I’ve edited that paragraph to express what I was trying to say more clearly. Thanks.
February 16, 2012 at 11:18 am
Reason
Sounds to me like he’s just being a good father with a sense of humor… let’s not be dramatic here.
February 16, 2012 at 11:33 am
william winegar
I joke about the same thing with any father I know with daughters.
We laugh about cleaning our hunting rifle whenever a new boy comes to the house. Or something in the vein. It is a joke. Obviously you do not have daughters.
February 16, 2012 at 11:34 am
DK
A good father who’s patronizing views of female sexuality denies all women easier access to the morning after pill?
February 16, 2012 at 11:37 am
Angus Johnston
William, I’ve got two daughters, and they’re not far from the ages Obama’s daughters were when he started making these jokes in public.
And “Reason,” if this was just about his dumb sense of humor, I’d have written the post differently. As I noted, Obama’s Plan B stance comes from the same perspective as his jokes about his kids. That’s not just humor, it’s public policy.
And you know what? That policy is a barrier to MY daughters getting access to birth control if they happen to need it at some point in the future. Obama’s patriarchal attitudes toward teenage girls don’t stop at the gates of the White House, it turns out.
February 16, 2012 at 12:11 pm
A Moore
This is a ridiculous post.
February 16, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Richard
William, I have a daughter too (I guess that makes it ok to weigh in?), and that kind of joke is bullshit.
February 16, 2012 at 1:08 pm
Caitlin Podiak (@CaitlinPodiak)
This is not a ridiculous post. I’m glad my own father is enlightened enough not to find the humor in these stale and offensive “jokes.” (Good jokes subvert the dominant paradigm rather than reinforcing it.)
February 16, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Dawn.
Thank you for this insightful post, Angus. Those sexist jokes wouldn’t bother me as much if they didn’t extend to his policy-making. I’ve known fathers who made jokes like that but who never actually tried to control their daughters’ social/dating lives (like my own father), which doesn’t mean the jokes are okay, they still perpetuate a sexist mindset, but it would be more permissible if they were “just jokes.” In Obama’s case, they’re not “just jokes.”
February 16, 2012 at 1:40 pm
M John Love
This is a GREAT insightful, well done post. THANK YOU for raising these issues!
February 16, 2012 at 1:42 pm
Pax (Ro)mama
Although they might not have the gravitas of the POTUS, I’m inclined to state that all fathers should think twice about the gendered implications of these types of statements. They do nothing, in effect, to practically protect their daughters from intimate partner violence.
I believe the dads’ concern is genuine; but *just* saying, “I will physically harm any boy [as Angus points out, a heterosexist assumption] who gets too close to my daughter” only functions to assert literal/figurative paternalism. It does not help equip the daughters with a sense of empowered autonomy. Nor does it educate the boys to whom it’s directed on how healthy, mutually respectful relationships *should* operate. I assume — or hope — most dads who make such pronouncements are only using them to punctuate broad-base efforts to promote and support life skills development.
February 16, 2012 at 1:48 pm
autumnthing
This is a brilliant post.
Thank you!
I am one of two [adult] daughters.
I am also a mother.
February 16, 2012 at 4:33 pm
John
This is an uptight and ridiculously insensitive post. Leaving aside the normal protectiveness a father would feel for his growing daughters in a society in which 1 in 3 women are sexually assaulted, date rape and partner abuse is as common as sneezing and black women’s sexuality is routinely whoreified, imagine doing so (something I’m sure Angus never bothered to do) as one of the most public families in the world in which threats are routinely made against his family (see statistics on the almost geometric increase in threats received by Secret Service since Obama took office). I don’t see how you look at that and say “He’s probably a little more protective than most but I can see why”.
February 16, 2012 at 5:05 pm
Angus Johnston
I hear what you’re saying, John, and you’re not the only one who’s raised these objections to the post. But I do think you’re wrong, and here’s why:
There are, broadly speaking, two things that dads fret about in regard to their daughters’ developing into sexual beings. The first is the possibility something horrible will be done to them, and the second is the inevitability they’ll go out into the world and leave their childhood (and their father) behind.
There’s a blurry line between the two categories, of course — nobody wants to see their child get their heart broken, or dumped, or treated poorly. But they are two distinct categories nonetheless.
And if you look at the jokes Obama makes, they’re all jokes about the second kind of anxiety. He says he wants to become a principal so boys won’t talk to his daughters in high school (or college!). He says he wants to use the secret service to scare off boys who “want to start dating them.” He jokes about putting the girls under lock and key, and about killing the Jonas Brothers — THE JONAS BROTHERS — with bomber drones.
Think about that last joke. The Jonas Brothers aren’t anyone’s idea of sexual predators. They’re Disney stars. They’ve been vocal advocates of virginity until marriage. They used to go around wearing purity rings, and for all I know they still do. A joke about killing the Jonas Brothers if they get too close to your daughters isn’t a joke about something happening that your daughters won’t want, it’s a joke about something happening that YOU don’t want.
If Obama’s jokes had been along the lines of “if any boy ever thinks of mistreating my daughters, he’d better remember that I know the nuclear codes,” I wouldn’t have written this post. That’s a very different joke than saying you want boys to be afraid to talk to your kid in the hallways at school, or that you wish you could keep her in a locked cage until she graduated.
It’s just not the same joke.
February 16, 2012 at 5:28 pm
Iris
Angus – I appreciate your writing this. You are correct, a father would not write this about his sons. It’s telling his daughters they must always be under the wing of a “daddy” in order to be protected. Please don’t tell me he participates in those totally creepy “chastity balls”. Yes, I think his decision to keep Plan B away from young women under 17 is directly related to wanting to personally regulate his daughters’ sex lives. And, by default, the sex life of the daughters of every other man in this country.
Thank you for bringing this into the light. For you guys who think POTUS’ joking about his daughters’ dating is ok, it’s not. It’s a continuation of the narrative that women are not really people. They are some breed apart that have to endure the vagaries of men – because that’s the way it is and has always been. Just imagine if your mother had made jokes like that about your dating life.
February 16, 2012 at 7:28 pm
Paul
As the father of a 9 year old boy and an 12 year old girl I think it’s a great post which highlights a particularly unhealthy view of gender roles, natural sexual behaviours, and sees sex outside marriage as basically “sinful”. These are very widespread views, particularly in religous communities and in my view are extremely harmful to young impressionable minds. My prediction would be that like may church kids, Obama’s girls will grow to either comply to the letter, or rebel at every turn.
February 18, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Sunday Reading « zunguzungu
[…] Barack Obama Can’t Stop Making Stupid Sexist Jokes About His Daughters’ Dating Lives […]
February 19, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Sunday Link Encyclopedia and Self-Promotion « Clarissa's Blog
[…] course, it’s easy to disregard in the midst of the Republican anti-women campaign but President Obama keeps making these very disturbing sexist jokes about his daughters. And this helps reinforce the environment where women’s bodies always belong to some […]
February 19, 2012 at 5:27 pm
Rob
I’ve got to side with the folks who find this post a little too uptight and dramatic. The jokes might be lame, but I make similar ones with my daughter. I frankly wouldn’t find much sexist about it, unless it were the only involvement he or any father ever had in educating his kids about what is and what isn’t a healthy relationship to have. I doubt, however, that he’s neglected or will neglect a real, serious, and joke-free discussion on the subject with them. That being neither funny nor anyone else’s business, I’m sure we won’t hear about it. Rightly so. React as you will, but I think it’s silly to be up in arms about a little joke.
February 19, 2012 at 8:15 pm
Tori
Thank you for this. I’m a daughter, and I’m fortunate enough to have had a dad who did not make jokes about my freedom or sexuality. I mean, I was raised with a very strict mantra of, “Don’t do stupid shit.” — But wanting to go to school and talk with girls and/or boys and have a social life and go away to college — and basically gain a sense of agency and independence — that was never included in “stupid shit.”
February 20, 2012 at 12:22 am
Conrad Miller
If this is the biggest criticism you can level at a sitting President three years into his first term, I feel *incredibly* fortunate.
Thank you.
February 20, 2012 at 2:10 am
Orlando
All the dudes here saying “It’s not sexist or wrong because I do it too”? You’re sexist and wrong.
More power to you, Angus, for calling it. Frankly, I don’t think Obama’s penchant for this line of humour has anything to do with his protective feelings towards his daughters. It’s a calculated pitch to the general public to show them what a great, ordinary dad he is, just like any dad. He’s using his daughters to buy conservative parents’ “this guy’s all right” points. And he’s probably copying Jed Bartlett, to boot.
February 20, 2012 at 7:15 am
Lauren Shannon
this seems like a massive over-reaction or an attempt to gin up more eyes on your blog… Dad’s make jokes like these, and dad’s worry about who their girls will date (prob. from birth) this makes PRESIDENT Obama (show some respect for the office even if you don’t respect the man) human, not sexist.
February 20, 2012 at 10:24 am
Angus Johnston
Lauren, the first two words of this blogpost are “President Obama.” Always have been.
February 20, 2012 at 11:53 am
Mike Wells
Every father makes jokes like this. Get a grip on reality. Obviously you need something new to complain about, but try and pick something that every single father on this planet doesn’t joke about. Seriously, I made jokes on this vein when I was still in high school, 10 years before I had any kids to worry about(And 20 years before I actually had a DAUGHTER to worry about). Fathers do this, whether they talk about how they will just ‘happen’ to pick Date Night as the time to clean their guns, or joke about making a more direct statement to the boys.
The only difference between Obama’s statements and the rest of ours is that he gets to use the predator drones as his leverage, whereas, I just get to joke about cleaning my rifle or making sure that the guns or my knife collection happen to be visible when my daughter’s future dates show up.
If this truly gets your knickers in a twist, then Obama needs to be at the end of a V…. E…. R…. Y…. long line, as I can guarantee you that you have heard these jokes hundreds of times before you ever even heard the name ‘Obama’…
February 20, 2012 at 12:07 pm
Medivh
Those claiming that these jokes aren’t sexist, or that Angus is too sensitive in posting this: you’re claiming ownership of your daughters.
Think about it. What are you protecting with your threats of violence (that you claim aren’t serious)? Something that belongs to your daughter, that you believe you should be protecting because property can’t make it’s own judgements. That’s what jokes about locking up daughters are all about. What jokes about shotguns and boyfriends are all about. Protecting your own property so that you can sell it into marriage in pristine condition.
Such horseshit when it’s laid out in front of you, no?
February 20, 2012 at 1:18 pm
GinBerlin
I live in a country where aspirin is not sold to people under 16, and without advice from a pharmacist, so I actually have no problem with requiring Plan B to require 16 or above.
Yep. Those comments are patronizing and patriarchal. However, as a parent, I have told my kids (6 and 8) that I’ll be moving to college with them. They can take that to mean that I want to always live with them (a quite standard trope in Europe), that I want to enjoy Uni again, or that I will protect them until they are 30. Does that make me sexist and patriarchal? Or does that depend upon my sex and that of my children? Do you only judge once you know what we both are? And, although I point out to my kids that girls can marry girls and boys can marry boys, they tell me they will only be marrying someone of the other sex, no matter what I say. (If they ever want to marry at all.) It’s not freaky or weird to expect that one’s children will have a heterosexual relationship- it is the norm. What’s wrong is to denigrate other people’s relationships.
So, I think Pres Obama is making jokes to humanize himself and to allow the freaks to feel that he is human (because someone with a brain scares them) and I think it would be bad if he did this too frequently while mentioning his children, but I understand the purpose: Bo is not that interesting to those of us who don’t care for dogs.
February 20, 2012 at 2:53 pm
Amadi
Seriously, the “all dads make these jokes” excuse is played out. Leaving aside the fact that it’s not true, the prevalence of this sort of humor is a problem in itself.
Fathers, you do not own your daughters. You do not own your daughters’ sexuality. You do not get to control who they’re attracted to and you really should not be making hints of violence to prevent them from engaging in age-appropriate, safe, consensual behavior.
What you should be doing is equipping your daughters with the information and security to they need to make good decisions about interpersonal relationships. You should be giving them a sense of safety so that when they come to the “interested in romantic connections” age, they can talk to you about their concerns and bring you their questions with faith that you’ll have meaningful things to tell them and not “jokes” or threats of restraint or violence against the boys or girls that they’re interested in.
That people are defending this speaks to a societal problem of people with no clue how to parent positively and attentively, and would rather repeat broken patterns and engender mistrust and distance from their daughters than thoughtfully engage with a new idea.
I encourage everyone, especially the women, who are thinking that this isn’t a problem to think to when they were teenagers, and all the things that they kept secret from their parents that in hindsight, they might’ve liked to be able to share, to get input on or help with. This kind of parenting is exactly why that sort of thing happens. I think daughters — and sons — deserve better than that.
February 20, 2012 at 3:39 pm
Mike Wells
//”That people are defending this speaks to a societal problem of people with no clue how to parent positively and attentively…”//
Actually, that people whine and bitch about it speaks to a societal problem of people who either have the stick so far up their rears that they might as well not talk to ANYBODY about ANYTHING, lest they get offended by something as simple as a weather report, or that people just want to complain about Obama wherever they can.
Seriously people, take a breath, quit hyperventilating, and you should all be ok come tomorrow.
February 20, 2012 at 3:45 pm
Angus Johnston
Honestly, Mike, you’re coming across a lot more hyperventilatey than Amadi.
February 20, 2012 at 3:57 pm
Irene
I’d also like to emphasize that the president is promoting a pretty nasty view of young men as inevitable sexual predators (the old “boys only want one thing” stuff). That’s not good either. And you’d think he’d know, if anyone does, what harm that kind of demonization can do, given the crap young black men get in this society.
February 20, 2012 at 3:59 pm
Mike Wells
//”Honestly, Mike, you’re coming across a lot more hyperventilatey than Amadi.”//
Yeah, because telling people to relax and stop over-reacting ALWAYS sounds “more hyperventilatey”.
February 20, 2012 at 4:10 pm
Angus Johnston
Well, yeah. Actually, it often does. If people are calmly discussing something, and someone barges in to tell them they need to stop freaking out and pull the sticks out of their asses, because otherwise they “they might as well not talk to ANYBODY about ANYTHING,” yeah, that’s kind of hyperventilatey.
This is a minor blogpost on a minor blog. It’s nothing to get all that worked up about. But there seem to be quite a few folks who find it so beyond the pale that they feel the need to come here — sometimes multiple times — and tell everyone to calm down.
It’s a little weird.
February 20, 2012 at 4:52 pm
Myshkin
For real though, the dude just wants his daughters to stay kids. How’s that different from any other parent on the planet? So he covers up his anxieties with crass jokes about drones and locks. Does anyone here, for even a moment, thinks that President Obama will be anything less than an absolutely supportive, loving, and empowering figure in his daughter’s lives?
The author of this post attempted to justify its substantiveness by citing a policy decision about the availability of the morning after pill as proof that these comments are more than just jokes. Get serious. You don’t strike me as an ignorant individual. That decision was solely a political one, and you know it. Something like 70% of the public opposes that policy. I’m not saying it was the right choice, but you don’t become president and stay president by opposing 70% of the American people.
I could take you more seriously if you wanted to talk about how this president should try harder to shape public opinion about such things (I would argue he should save his political capital for more consequential things). But to make this post about a joke he made in passing, about the perfectly normal anxieties all parents face about their children, both boys and girls, growing up too fast, is just ridiculous. Surely you can find a more intelligent way of highlighting any policy differences you may have with the president, than picking on his awkward attempts to cope with his anxieties. He’s only human.
February 20, 2012 at 6:38 pm
anna m
The creepiest thing about all of this isn’t that Obama is apparently a normal man with two daughters growing up saying ‘dad things’ but that you keep track of all of the ‘dad things’ he says in relation to his daughters future dating lives…..
February 20, 2012 at 6:44 pm
brooke
What a ridiculous, petty article. President Obama sounds like every other concerned father of daughters out there that I know– including my own hubby. They all joke about meeting their daughter’s at the door with a bat in hand. Chill.
February 20, 2012 at 6:59 pm
Tori
They all joke about meeting their daughter’s at the door with a bat in hand.
They joke about threatening or committing violence against people — and people pointing out how effed up that is are the ones who need to chill?
February 20, 2012 at 7:15 pm
Angus Johnston
No, Tori, you misunderstand. They joke about threatening or committing violence against people because those people are romantically inclined toward people they love. Because of course that makes complete sense and isn’t weird or creepy at all.
February 20, 2012 at 7:20 pm
Tori
I see. So when one of my early boyfriends asked my dad for permission to date me (I grew up in a fundamentalist religious community, though my parents did not subscribe wholeheartedly), and my dad’s response was, “What the hell? Why don’t you ask her?” — My dad was actually the creepy one, yes?
February 20, 2012 at 7:24 pm
Angus Johnston
And I know I’ve said this before, but I’m going to say it again one more time.
I’m a father. I’m a father of daughters. And the fact that I’m a father of daughters is the biggest reason I wrote this post. Because as a father of daughters I don’t appreciate it when the president denies my kids the ability to make their own life decisions, and does so in my name. As a father of daughters I don’t appreciate it when the president tells jokes that make me cringe every freaking time I hear them.
As a father of daughters I believe passionately in the idea that one of the most damaging and most common mistakes that fathers of daughters make is to lock their kids away, pathologize normal sexual/romantic development, make their kids believe that they have to choose between the love of their father and the love of their romantic partners. And whether or not that’s what Obama is up to in his own private family life, he’s sending the message with these jokes that that’s exactly what dads SHOULD be doing. That they should tell these jokes. That they should rebuff their daughters’ suitors. That they should treat dating as something to be fended off, and their kids’ potential partners as hostile adversaries.
And yes, the message he’s sending is that his daughters, and everyone’s daughters, are straight, and that the possibility that they’re not isn’t something to be considered, something to be taken into account, something to be recognized and acknowledged and embraced.
So actually, Mike, I owe you an apology. Because I DO have my knickers in a twist. Because this is about my kids. This is about the next generation. This is about what kind of world girls who are five and nine and ten and thirteen today are going to age into in a very short time. And because I think our president is doing it wrong. Because I think he’s doing harm.
And because, as I said in the original post, he should cut it the hell out.
February 20, 2012 at 7:25 pm
Angus Johnston
Tori: exactly.
February 20, 2012 at 7:52 pm
Myshkin
Oh, ok. So now the President is a homophobic bigot because he assumes his daughters aren’t gay, like the vast majority of people – more than 90% of people are attracted to the opposite sex (Binson, Diane; Michaels, Stuart; Stall, Ron; Coates, Thomas J.; Gagnon, John H.; Catania, Joseph A. (1995). “Prevalence and Social Distribution of Men Who Have Sex with Men: United States and Its Urban Centers”. The Journal of Sex Research 32 (3): 245–54.).
There’s nothing wrong with being gay. But it’s a small segment of the population who are gay, and it isn’t unreasonable that a straight father would assume his children would be straight. What’s important is how he would treat them if he found out they weren’t. Do you suspect that President Obama would love his daughters any less if he found out they were gay?
February 20, 2012 at 8:03 pm
Angus Johnston
It’s not that he’s assuming that they’re straight, it’s that he’s DECLARING that they’re straight.
Is it impossible for you to imagine that a child, hearing over and over and over again that their father is expecting, assuming, declaring, asserting, that they’re going to grow up to be straight, might come to believe that it was important to their father that they be straight? Is that so bizarre?
When I talk to my kids about romantic love, I make it gender neutral, inclusive. I don’t make a big deal about it, but they know, and they’ve always known, that some girls grow up to fall in love with boys and some girls (sometimes the same girls) grow up to fall in love with girls.
I do this for two reasons. First — and most importantly — because it’s TRUE, and because I like to tell my kids the truth when I can. And second because if they wind up not being straight, it’s important to me that they know that I’m completely all right with that, that my response to it isn’t something that they should have a moment’s worry about. Because why on earth would I want them to be anxious about that?
And again, this isn’t just about how he talks to his daughters. It’s about how he talks about his daughters in public. How wonderful would it be if he — assuming that he found the need to discuss his kids’ romantic lives in public at all — just quietly made it clear that he doesn’t know or care what configurations those romantic lives might take? Is there a downside to that? Could there possibly be a downside to that?
I’m not saying he’s a homophobe. I’m not saying he’s a bigot. I have no opinion about that stuff. But I AM saying that when you, as a parent, go around acting like gayness doesn’t exist, gay kids are harmed. And when you do that as the President of the United States, that harm is magnified.
How could it not be?
February 20, 2012 at 8:34 pm
monica
Well said.
February 20, 2012 at 9:57 pm
Myshkin
Isn’t the source of your outrage the fact that President Obama is “expecting, assuming, declaring, asserting” that his daughters, under his watch, won’t have any romantic contact with the opposite sex? It’s not like he’s some jack-ass father, giving his sons a box of condoms in the hopes they’ll go and “conquer” as many women as possible. He’s not saying that he expects his daughters to go to pursue these boys, but that those boys will want to pursue them. Are you so committed to this faux outrage that you missed that point?
Would it be nice if he went out of his way to say, it’s OK to be gay? Yeah. Has he? I’d say he’s done more than that: (Defence of Marriage Act, federal government won’t defend; Don’t Ask Don’t tell, repealed; the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act, signed into law; participating in the “it gets better” campaign; etc.)
It was real cute the way you said “I’m not saying he’s a bigot. I have no opinion about that stuff”. But you should have an opinion. President Obama is demonstrably not any kind of homophobe or bigot. What he is, is the average parent who doesn’t want to see his children grow up too fast. And boys are the number one culprit when it comes to making little girls grow up too fast. That, and the internet, which I understand he only lets them use on the weekends. I suppose you might have some outrage about the patriarchal underpinnings of that decision too.
I know there isn’t anything anyone could say in these comments that is going to change your mind about how you feel about this. I just want you to consider that perhaps you might be contributing to the stereotype of the over-sensitive “champion of the oppressed”. Women and homosexuals face real problems in contemporary society. But when people listen to you spout this trivial stuff, it’s much easier to imagine we’ve made all the necessary progress towards real equality, and it’s only the hippies complaining now.
That is definitely not the case, except the part about the hippies complaining.
February 20, 2012 at 11:36 pm
marypose
“What he is, is the average parent who doesn’t want to see his children grow up too fast. And boys are the number one culprit when it comes to making little girls grow up too fast.”
Understandable.
But he is also–note, also–the President of the United States. Whether he likes it or not, many people and families look to him and consciously or not take bits and pieces of how he portrays his family relationship, opinions, what-have-you that has to do with parenting opinions back into their own lives.
Johnston mentioned in the original blogpost that he probably is a great father to his daughters. That’s not what came into question. What came into question was that he is making these kinds of jokes often in the wide view of the public eye. That everyone in the nation is seeing those kinds of jokes helps promote the idea that young girls need more protection in the minds of people that don’t only see them as jokes, because not everyone of the millions in the US see them as “only jokes.” It’s the idea of “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.”
I unfortunately have a father who hears those kinds of jokes and heartily agrees with the ideology that may be behind them. Note, that MAY be behind them. I don’t know what the President is thinking, nor do I live in his home, obviously.
Anywho, the idea that young girls need more protection from the father as opposed to young boys is preposterous. Every child needs protection from harmful things and people. And every child needs to also be equipped with the knowledge to recognize things as they are and come straight to whoever may be their guardian if in danger, not only the father.
At the same time, once the child starts to mature, the parent should recognize their developing autonomy and react or behave accordingly, not saying things offhandedly that make a child think twice. Because really, children don’t always know their parents are joking. They often take their parent’s words at face value and hold them as their parents honest-to-god opinion or promise about something. If a child hears their parent saying negative things, joking or otherwise, about any boyfriends or girlfriends that they may have once they start getting older, they most likely won’t be so inclined to come forward to their parents about those things. And they’ll remember and take it to heart, even if we as adults shake it off as “just a joke.”
Also, these kinds of jokes really don’t help with trying to even the playing field for the future generations. If his wife does her best to refrain from making them, why can’t he?
Honestly, yes, no one is losing their life over one or two jokes that the President may make. But when it has the potential to affect so many people because of the position he’s in, they shouldn’t be made. Especially if he is trying to promote women’s rights for his daughters in the future.
Secondly, the idea that boys are the number one culprits behind children (I insist on expanding the term “girls” to cover both genders because it is not fair that boys should be any less “protected” than our precious girls) growing up too fast: I have a really, really big problem with that. In many cultures, usually it’ll be the other women in the family, and it’s nothing unusual. In my life, it was because of a woman. And boys are unfortunately made to grow up too fast at times at the hands of women.
I just think that the statement would be better if it read more like “Unscrupulous adults and sometimes dubious other peers are the number one culprit in making children grow up too fast.”
February 21, 2012 at 7:27 am
Myshkin
Well said, truly.
February 21, 2012 at 8:01 am
Donna
He is treating his daughters like property not people. A rather traditional male view. Are we sure he is not a closet Republican?
February 21, 2012 at 9:48 am
marypose
Donna, I’m not sure we want to go out on that limb. Like I said, his jokes may not necessarily reflect how he treats them personally. He may actually love them to death and give them all the tools they need to grow into exceptional individuals.
It’s just the fact that he is one of the most public figures in the world at the moment.
February 21, 2012 at 9:55 am
Paul
Well, so much for individual freedom! Because a person (in this case, the President) doesn’t fit your mold, you attack his values. But I’m not surprised. Having grown up in the 60’s, and re-developing my value system as a result of those experiences, I know where you’re coming from. I see the links. I see the star. You should go back to the 60’s, and stay on campus. Those of us who graduated and grew up moved off campus and now live in the real world, with genuine beliefs in what is right and what is wrong.
February 21, 2012 at 10:19 am
marypose
The “attack” isn’t on his personal values. I can’t reinforce the idea enough that even the original post mentions that the President’s words may not necessarily reflect his own actual views.
It’s that he runs the risk of perpetuating a disequal idea and perhaps causing more harm than good in some, not all, homes where people don’t just see his light public statements as jokes, because he is such a public figure.
It is the people in the public’s eyes that set the tone for many people’s lives, whether we know it or not. They are often the examples that some people follow and that many young children are encouraged to look up to. If they see negative statements and jokes about the supposed defense of one gender over another a good portion of the time, it somewhat lessens the individuals of that gender and that cycle continues as the children take it to heart and grow with it.
True, not all of them may agree with the President’s remarks. And many of them may see them as merely jokes and never apply such things in their lives, growing up to be incredible individuals with great parenting skills and great, independent children someday.
But not all.
And the few that don’t will feel that their actions and their aggressive opinions are seen as inconsequential in the public eye, if not outright condoned.
February 21, 2012 at 10:23 am
marypose
And even if I did know his personal values and agreed or disagreed with them, I would want him to keep them out of his politics or out of his public speeches. He is to be making the best decisions for the majority of the nation, and his behavior ought to reflect that.
Which, hey, it has for the most part.
February 21, 2012 at 10:45 am
marypose
And myshkin, I wanted to take a second and go back to your point. The idea that children can take their parent’s jokes seriously, I also mean to extend that to the heterosexual tendencies of jokes.
Hell, kids are smart. They think about what you do say and what you don’t say. So if a child constantly hears their parent joke about the same thing from the one-sided point of view (suppose, for a girl, she hears her father constantly joke about how he’s going to ensure that a boyfriend keeps his safe distance from her, or for a boy, vice-versa [which again, almost never happens, but for the sake of evenness]), if they turn out to be gay, they won’t be comfortable with coming to their parents about it, even if their parents actually wouldn’t mind.
Because children take things to heart, even if we don’t mean them to. That might be what Johnston meant to say about that.
So it isn’t that the President is homophobic, but in making the jokes, he is creating the impression, however false it may be, that he expects his daughters to be straight and that he may have a problem with them turning out otherwise–again, not my problem what actually goes on in his house and how he actually views things, or how his daughters actually feel about people.
February 21, 2012 at 5:08 pm
Amadi
Can someone claiming that “this isn’t how he parents his daughters personally” explain to me at what points, when he’s speaking about his daughters, he’s doing so as someone other than their father?
I’m trying to find this dividing line between “things said when he is their father” and “things said when he isn’t their father” and for the life of me, I don’t think it exists.
February 21, 2012 at 9:28 pm
razorjeff
And yet, had Bush made the same remarks in jest I’m sure his supporters would have found them “charming”. For Pete’s sake, let the guy be a normal dad and make lame jokes.
February 27, 2012 at 2:18 pm
Laraia D.
While I appreciate the feminist lens here, may I introduce another. The protection of white femininity has been mainstay in American History. Meanwhile women of color (i.e. black women) have been targets of unspeakable sexual violence and promoted as stereotypical whores or asexual mammys. In this context, and particularly at this moment where pop culture still treats the femininity of black women largely as an oxymoron, maybe it is refreshing that a black father is stating publicly – my black female children are valuable to me. That’s not a message many young black girls get.
Can he find another way to say this? Sure. I’m sure he has. What Im saying is these statements as anti-feminist as they are, still have some value in a racial context.
‘rai
March 12, 2012 at 3:08 am
Kristina
Well written, insightful…it’s refreshing and commendable to read a post like this written from a male’s perspective. When I first began reading, I completely disagreed with you. But by the end of the article, I realized that your points are completely valid. As a thirty year old woman whose father never made a joke about dating boys, I sometimes felt that he didn’t care about what I did. But the older I got and the more our relationship developed, I began to see that he trusted my judgment and that he believed he equipped me with the knowledge and strength to make the right choices.
Unfortunately, many people do not realize how much a simple attitude, or even an expression said in “jest,” can impact our social views. I understand why men say things about protecting their daughters from boys, and I understand that most men aren’t literally threatening potential boyfriends. However, it’s just one piece of a larger picture; the idea that you need to protect your daughter from a boy leads her to believe she is incapable of protecting herself. If men want to protect their female children, then why don’t they equip them with the same self confidence, skill, and knowledge as their male children? Why not empower them? If you treat your young daughter like an insecure, fragile flower who is incapable of protecting herself, she is more likely to become a victim. You might as well hand the robber a gun because you are perpetuating her vulnerability.
And if you are just uncomfortable with the idea of your daughter growing up and engaging in a consensual relationship, then you aren’t allowing her the opportunity to live her life freely. If you are confident in your child, she will be confident in what you have taught her. Simple.
If we’re not analyzing our actions as individuals (and as a society) and if we are not able to stop and ask ourselves, do the little things we do and say impact or encourage a certain behavior, then we are naive and ignorant.
Admittedly, I jumped to the conclusion that you were being overly sensitive about this issue at first; you challenged something I hadn’t thought about in a long time. Keeping these things fresh in our minds and forcing ourselves to observe our thoughts and actions is what defines our wisdom, intelligence, growth, etc.
It is one thing to disagree with this post but for those people who wrote “this is a ridiculous article,” I am inclined to believe you are either defensive because you are guilty of the behavior OR you are simply ignorant. Thank you Angus, for challenging a pattern of thought that contributes to gender inequality, and for having the guts to educate other men and women who aren’t quite as perceptive or educated as you are.
The only defense I have for Obama in this case is that he does not have boys. It’s not fair to assume he wouldn’t feel uncomfortable about his boys dating or becoming sexually active. It’s unlikely, but you never know. That being said, it is still a stifling pattern that continues to perpetuate the way young women feel about themselves and their independence.
March 19, 2012 at 11:46 pm
Gee
Waaaaaaaait a minute here…all the whining about a dad being protective and using the same tired jokes that you hear on any given sitcom – FOR EVER – I’m tossing out the window. It’s stoopid. My puritan grandmother wouldn’t even bat an eye at any of that.
I want to address the new psycho-babble term people on here are throwing around…this “hetero-sexism”. You mean to tell me that by saying, “Yea man, when my son gets older he’s gonna have the ladies chasing after him…he’s gonna be a little Cassanova!!!” – is heterosexist???!!!!! It’s a freakin’ crime now to assume my kid will grow up and be, of all things in the world – STRAIGHT and like women??? I’m wrong for NOT aknowledging the possibility of some other crap??? BULL!!! I won’t hear a syllable of it – let alone a word, and I don’t give a sh!!t how un-PC it may be. PERIOD.
March 19, 2012 at 11:48 pm
Tori
Your loss.
— The queer child of heterosexist parents. :D
March 20, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Gee
Haha. I think not. My kids are 18 and 16 – and very straight. I’d say YOUR parents LOST. Everything here grew up ALL RIGHT.
March 26, 2012 at 6:59 pm
Zoe
Oh my I do question your intelligence.
Actually, this was a fairly well put together post and did do a good job or arguing your point, but in all reality, if you are looking for something to complain about concerning Obama, can you really find nothing better?
“They’re not really jokes.” The problem with this statement supplies that you believe that what he is saying is meant to be taken as the truth, that he actually does intend to do all of the things listed above. I realize that perhaps your meaning is more vague than that however, because you do not SERIOUSLY believe that Obama is going to become the principal of his daughters school, do you?
Another comment I would like to make; calling him heterosexist because he mentions that he does not want his daughters talking to boys is simply ridiculous. I firmly believe that everyone, no matter what sexuality, is equal. There have also been times when I have mentioned that my kids will marry people of the opposite sex. Not because I am sure of this fact, just because as of our current timezone, the majority of the people in the world are heterosexual. Not to say there is not a large group of homosexuals around; I believe 1 in 11 is the approximate estimate, however I can’t be sure. People were designed to reproduce, and two people of the same sex don’t get that job done. Let me once again emphasize that I really do believe that love can be found between two people no matter what their sex, however I don’t believe you can hold it against him if he assumes that his daughters will be straight. Furthermore, it is very likely that his daughters would have mentioned boys on numerous occasions. Can you really say that he does not know his daughters well enough to at least make a GUESS as to their sexuality? Of course, they very well may be lesbians or bisexual, however his comment held no insult towards homosexuals therefore it is wrong for you to take it as such.
As for Obama blowing up the Jonas Brothers, I’m not even deeming that comment worthy of a response.
May 9, 2012 at 3:16 am
Leah
Trust me, this isn’t sexism. He’s just being a dad (:
June 6, 2012 at 12:38 pm
American Patriot
Obama’s decision is clearly based on his daughters access to the morning after pill. But, as he himself stated, and is fervently pushing for, he has absolutely no problem with the murder of a fetus, or the slaughter of full term babies with the cruel and immoral partial abortion. They all are pure and simple mass murder and genocide. Yet, he pushes for abortion in any form and appoints judges who are radical in their rulings “for” it, but does not want his daughters able to access the morning after pill because he thinks it will encourage them to have sex and he will lose control of them. Hmmmmmmm. There’s that “control” thing again.
June 6, 2012 at 12:42 pm
American Patriot
I wonder how he would react if one of them got pregnant? Would he use his predator drones to kill the boyfriend and the abortionist? He would have to in order to keep it quiet, as he did with those 3 gay men he had an affair with, and Andrew Brietbart and Andrew’s coroner. Whatever you do, you must avoid “speaking” against or getting on his bad side.
June 29, 2012 at 9:31 am
Debora
It is nice to see that someone finally understands that these jokes are not healthy from father to daughter. My father joked about this in regards to me and it made me feel very distant from him and that something was wrong with me as a female. I noticed that these jokes were never spoken toward my 3 brothers, only me. This kind of joking only creates distance between father and daughter and will possibly push the daughter to someone who disrespects her. That is what happened to me. The only men that I’ve known who “joke” this way about their girls, were once predators on women themselves in their younger years. I suggest father’s clean up their own hearts and spend quality and respectful time with their daughters, which will teach these girls how to be wise and safe on their own.
June 29, 2012 at 9:44 am
Debora
I need to clarify the word “predator” in my above post, I would like to say that I mean that in more of a mentality version of the word such as selfish and disrespectful toward women. Not necessarily the true criminal definition of the word. just wanted to clear that up.
August 7, 2013 at 7:14 pm
raebryant
Angus, I appreciate your attention to the patriarchal dogma. It shows you have a critical eye toward traditional family structures and how they impact women/daughters, how this can broaden to a socio-political paradigm. Rape culture has been built on this. It is also obvious that you take great care in how you mentor your daughters. All to be respected.
Several of the comments to your post bring relevant and well-though discourse. Some do not seem to be intelligent or logical to me, but it’s not my place to mark them.
Regarding your thesis, I sense a generalization and stretch regarding Obama’s comments and how they relate to drone warfare, perhaps not so much generalization regarding “Plan B.” I would align a good deal with you on that. So I’ll speak directly to the over-protective father meets drone warfare thesis.
I’m not sure an off-handed drone comment shouldn’t be attributed to a man’s homicidal tendencies regarding would be suitors of his daughters. Sure, it’s a media sexy concept, one that could potentially be worthy of critique but it smacks of conspiracy unless directly evidenced in specific venue. Warfare, a nasty and horrible task of the commander in chief, does not set an axiom for domestic, and certainly not familial, conflict strategies. It sets a possibility, sure, but does Obama evidence domestic bullying? Has he shown violent outbreaks against his family or friends? The axiom setting takes it too far. It becomes a discourse based on fallacy.
I would offer a commonality as another potential way to look at all of this. In many female and or child “courting” and exploitation predation behaviors, perpetrators begin with an investigation of male roles in the female/child’s life. As right or wrong as this is, pimps, sex traffickers, etc. will often target girls and women and “weaker” males without what they perceive to be strong male “protection.” They will ask these questions up front, dig into the female or what they perceive to be the “weak” male’s past and glean whether or not there is this father or older brother protective threat. It is an effort to understand whether or not the target will be an easy mark or more complicated mark. More complicated marks often have stronger family with a strong male presence. There are certainly outliers, sure. Serial killers, etc. But the more common perpetrator will back off if he or she knows another strong male or female will kick their a##. This unfortunately coincides with a lack of strong female or “weak” male training, too, so I completely agree with you that Obama’s language should be more “I have taught my daughters how to identify predators and they will kick you in the b#### then I will kick you in the b#### and then Michelle will find you and you don’t even want to imagine what she’ll do to you,” (of course, the b#### would not likely be a term in the president’s vernacular, though, he may or may not be thinking it). Regardless this preceding example would be better than “I, myself, man with drone power will kick you in the b#### because I am the He-Man and protector of everything.” The preceding is obviously a far better identifier of strong female individuality as well as familial structure.
As a woman who grew up in a family with very little equality and gender awareness, a boatload of fatherly control, subsequently raped, I empathize with your voice here, but I think we can sometimes go too far in our assessment of comments out of context and applying intentions and motivations. I find it a little offensive, as if the female position and familial training is a prop for drone discourse, a lead in. I’m sure you do not intend this but it is a risk this thesis runs, I believe, without further research. Just one view.
Regardless, thank you for your thoughts on this. I believe this discourse to be well-intentioned. Your daughters are very fortunate, and I recognize that these are all issues worthy of discussion.
August 8, 2013 at 2:04 am
The Doctor T. J. Eckleburg Review » Don’t Fuck with Obama’s Daughters or He Will Drone You
[…] recently come across a thesis on how President Obama’s comments to the Jonas Brothers and their imagined intentions toward […]