I’m not sure how big a story this is outside California, but a 15-year-old girl disappeared awhile back and there’s been a huge hunt to look for her. Yesterday they arrested a suspect and are going to charge him with kidnapping and murder (even though they don’t have a body yet…but I think they know more than they’re telling at this point). I feel terrible for the family–that’s got to be one of the most horrible things that any family will ever experience. My comments here don’t relate directly to this case–it’s just the latest in a string.
I was reading the local paper this morning and the Sheriff made the following comment:
Every time I see something like that it just makes my blood boil. Damn it, a 15-year-old is not a “little girl”! Think of any 15-year-old girls you know. Then think of how they might react if someone referred to them as a “little girl” (with the possible exception of finding it charming if their mom or dad called them “my little girl”.)
This happens a lot in these kinds of cases. I’ve seen it in stories talking about everything from girls who actually are “little girls” all the way up to 16- and 17-year olds. Ask yourself: Have you ever seen a story where a male teen disappeared and the media got all over itself talking about “making sure no more little boys go through this”? No? Didn’t think so.
I realize I’m probably a little overboard about this; it’s kind of one of my hot buttons. But does anyone else feel the same?
I do feel really bad for the family of the girl around here, though. They’re going to have a pretty tough time of it, and I wish them strength.
I understand your point but I think the outrage is a little misplaced. The reason you only see diminutive terms used for ‘little (white) girls’ is that nobody really cares enough about any other group to even look for them very hard let alone put the case all over the news.
But you already know the reason why they do this…you posted in your op.
Every girl that get’s abducted is some parent’s “little girl”. I expect my daughters to be strong willed independent women, but as long as I’m alive, they will be my little girls regardless of their age.
The press and public officials are appealing to the emotional sentiment of the public. I see no problem with that in this situation.
No. Like I said in the OP, it’s just something I notice. It’s not “outrage,” (okay, the “blood boil” comment was hyperbole) it’s just one of those mildly annoying things that seems to happen a lot. It doesn’t diminish my real outrage at the actual crime. <shrug> Just an observation, and I wanted to see if anybody else agreed with me, that’s all.
Yeah, but my question is this, then: Every boy is “somebody’s little boy,” too, but they never do it for boys (at least not boys over the age of 10 or 11). Why not?
Maybe it’s not widespread (I don’t make a habit of following every missing person case I come across) but I have seen it on more than one occasion. It’s entirely possible I just happened to notice the few that were out there and extrapolated incorrectly. I actually hope this is true.
I’ll throw in with the OP on this one. I’ve noticed it a few times and also found it jarring/annoying. The crime is bad enough as it is; there’s no need to further sensationalize it by referring to a nearly-grown teenaged girl as a “little girl,” which is a phrase that evokes a 2nd-grader in pigtails.
Among high school teachers, it’s my experience that both boys and girls are referred to this way. I think it’s our way to remind ourselves that even though they look like huge, lumbering adults, their brains are still as close to 5 as to 35.
Let me just clarify one thing: I’m absolutely not referring to parents. Of course parents and other relatives are likely to refer to a kid regardless of age as “our little girl” or “our little boy.” My annoyance is reserved for law enforcement, media, etc.
(Sorry I seem to be pouncing on this–it’s a slow morning at work. :P)
Most parent’s don’t refer to their 15 year old sons as little boys, but they do refer to their daughters as their little girls. Even parent’s have a gender bias. So what? Daughters are considered deserving of more protection than sons. It’s human nature.
I’m sorry; but even after reading the thread twice, I don’t see how this has a negative impact on your life. Honestly, why are you even mildly annoyed?
What difference does it make? Shall I go through the archives of the SDMB and find all the strange things that annoy various folks? (I’m not going to do that, btw.) <shrug> You don’t agree with me, that’s fine. I’m not asking you to. I offered an opinion and asked if anyone shared it. I’ll put you in the “no” column.
I’m not a teacher, but I do work at a high school. Most 15 year olds are far from looking like adults, let alone acting like adults. Take a look at consecutive yearbook photos, and it’s pretty obvious there’s a lot of growth between 15 and 18, even without accounting for behavior.
Exactly. And the source of my annoyance isn’t particularly that they do it for girls–it’s that they only do it for girls. Annoyances don’t always have to be rational–and sometimes things that are done in the name of “human nature” (like Omar’s comment about people naturally being more protective of girls than boys) are annoying to me. This is one of them.
Is the snark really necessary? I’m sure we all feel terrible about the case in question (I know I do–it’s right near where I live, so I’ve been kind of following it more than I would some other case. I was really hoping they would find her alive, though fearing that it wasn’t likely). But my comments are more general in nature. I only brought up the case because it was the latest one I’ve seen.
This may be a result of POV. How old are you? Do you have any kids?
I am 50. I have a daughter who is 11 years old. I am a teacher, this year of 7th graders. To me, 15 *is *a little girl. My guess is that the sheriff is from closer to my demographic than what I suspect is yours. I may well be wrong, but my guess is that you are closer to 15 than to 50.
