Odd Girl Out, Revised and Updated: The Hidden Culture of Aggression in Girls

by Rachel Simmons

A revised and updated edition of the 2002 New York Times bestseller from the country's leading expert on bullying, with new material on cyberbullying, and helping girls handle the dangers of life online.

  • Format: Paperback
  • ISBN-13/ EAN: 9780547520193
  • ISBN-10: 0547520190
  • Pages: 432
  • Publication Date: 08/03/2011
  • Carton Quantity: 24

Also available in:

About the Book
About the Author
  • About the Book
    A revised and updated edition of the 2002 New York Times bestseller from the country's leading expert on bullying, with new material on cyberbullying, and helping girls handle the dangers of life online.

    When Odd Girl Out was first published, it became an instant bestseller and ignited a long-overdue conversation about the hidden culture of female bullying. Today, the dirty looks, taunting notes, and social exclusion that plague girls’ friendships have gained new momentum in cyberspace.

    In this updated edition, educator and bullying expert Rachel Simmons gives girls, parents, and educators proven and innovative strategies for navigating social dynamics in person and online, as well as brand-new classroom initiatives and step-by-step parental suggestions for dealing with conventional bullying. With up-to-the-minute research and real-life stories, Odd Girl Out continues to be the definitive resource on the most pressing social issues facing girls today.

    Reading Group Guide and Teachers' Guide available at www.marinnerreadersguides.com.
  • About the Author
  • Excerpts

    chapter one
    the hidden culture of
    aggression in girls

    The Linden School campus is nestled behind a web of sports fields
    that seem to hold at bay the bustling city in which it resides. On Monday
    morning in the Upper School building, students congregated languidly,
    catching up on the weekend, while others sat knees-to-chest
    on the floor, flipping through three-ring binders, cramming for tests.
    The students were dressed in styles that ran the gamut from trendy
    to what can only be described, at this age, as defiant. Watching them,
    it is easy to forget this school is one of the best in the region, its students
    anything but superficial. This is what I came to love about Linden:
    it celebrates academic rigor and the diversity of its students in
    equal parts. Over the course of a day with eight groups of ninth
    graders, I began each meeting with the same question: “What are
    some of the differences between the ways guys and girls are mean?”
      From periods one through eight, I heard the same responses.
    Girls can turn on you for anything,” said one. “Girls whisper,” said
    another. “They glare at you.” With growing certainty, they fired out
      “Girls are secretive.”
      “They destroy you from the inside.”
      “Girls are manipulative.”
      “There’s an aspect of evil in girls that there isn’t in boys.”
      “Girls target you where they know you’re weakest.”
      “Girls do a lot behind each other’s backs.”
      “Girls plan and premeditate.”
      “With guys you know where you stand.”
      “I feel a lot safer with guys.”
      In bold, matter-of-fact voices, girls described themselves to me as
    disloyal, untrustworthy, and sneaky. They claimed girls use intimacy
    to manipulate and overpower others. They said girls are fake, using
    each other to move up the social hierarchy. They described girls as
    unforgiving and crafty, lying in wait for a moment of revenge that
    will catch the unwitting target off guard and, with an almost savage
    eye-for-an-eye mentality, “make her feel the way I felt.”
      The girls’ stories about their conflicts were casual and at times
    filled with self-hatred. In almost every group session I held, someone
    volunteered her wish to have been born a boy because boys can
    “fight and have it be over with.”
      Girls tell stories of their anger in a culture that does not define
    their behaviors as aggression. As a result, their narratives are filled
    with destructive myths about the inherent duplicity of females. As
    poet and essayist Adrienne Rich notes,4 “We have been depicted as
    generally whimsical, deceitful, subtle, vacillating.”
      Since the dawn of time, women and girls have been portrayed
    as jealous and underhanded, prone to betrayal, disobedience, and secrecy.
    Lacking a public identity or language, girls’ nonphysical aggression
    is called “catty,” “crafty,” “evil,” and “cunning.” Rarely the
    object of research or critical thought, this behavior is seen as a natural
    phase in girls’ development. As a result, schools write off girls’
    conflicts as a rite of passage, as simply “what girls do.”
      What would it mean to name girls’ aggression? Why have myths
    and stereotypes served us so well and so long?
      Aggression is a powerful barometer of our social values. According
    to sociologist Anne Campbell, attitudes toward aggression crys-
    tallize sex roles, or the idea that we expect certain responsibilities to
    be assumed by males and females because of their sex.5 Riot grrls and
    women’s soccer notwithstanding, Western society still expects boys
    to become family providers and protectors, and girls to be nurturers
    and mothers. Aggression is the hallmark of masculinity; it enables
    men to control their environment and livelihoods. For better or for
    worse, boys enjoy total access to the rough and tumble. The link
    begins early: the popularity of boys is in large part determined by
    their willingness to play rough. They get peers’ respect for athletic
    prowess, resisting authority, and acting tough, troublesome, dominating,
    cool, and confident.
      On the other side of the aisle, females are expected to mature into
    caregivers, a role deeply at odds with aggression. Consider the ideal
    of the “good mother”: She provides unconditional love and care for
    her family, whose health and daily supervision are her primary objectives.
    Her daughters are expected to be “sugar and spice and everything
    nice.” They are to be sweet, caring, precious, and tender.
      “Good girls” have friends, and lots of them. As nine-year-old
    Noura told psychologists Lyn Mikel Brown and Carol Gilligan, perfect
    girls have “perfect relationships.”6 These girls are caretakers in
    training. They “never have any fights . . . and they are always together.
    . . . Like never arguing, like ‘Oh yeah, I totally agree with
    you.’” In depressing relationships, Noura added, “someone is really
    jealous and starts being really mean. . . . [It’s] where two really good
    friends break up.”
      A “good girl,” journalist Peggy Orenstein observes in Schoolgirls,
    is “nice before she is anything else—before she is vigorous, bright,
    even before she is honest.” She described the “perfect girl” as

    the girl who has no bad thoughts or feelings, the kind of person
    everyone wants to be with. . . . [She is] the girl who speaks quietly,
    calmly, who is always nice and kind, never mean or bossy. . . . She
    reminds young women to silence themselves rather than speak
    their true feelings, which they come to consider “stupid,” “selfish,”
    “rude,” or just plain irrelevant.7

    “Good girls,” then, are expected not to experience anger. Aggression
    endangers relationships, imperiling a girl’s ability to be caring
    and “nice.” Aggression undermines who girls have been raised to
      Calling the anger of girls by its name would therefore challenge
    the most basic assumptions we make about “good girls.” It would
    also reveal what the culture does not entitle them to by defining
    what nice really means: Not aggressive. Not angry. Not in conflict.
      Research confirms that parents and teachers discourage the emergence
    of physical and direct aggression in girls early on while the
    skirmishing of boys is either encouraged or shrugged off.8 In one example,
    a 1999 University of Michigan study found that girls were
    told to be quiet, speak softly, or use a “nicer” voice about three times
    more often than boys, even though the boys were louder. By the
    time they are of school age, peers solidify the fault lines on the playground,
    creating social groups that value niceness in girls and toughness
    in boys.
      The culture derides aggression in girls as unfeminine, a trend explored
    in chapter four. “Bitch,” “lesbian,” “frigid,” and “manly” are
    just a few of the names an assertive girl hears. Each epithet points out
    the viola...

  • Reviews
    Praise for ODD GIRL OUT

    "There has not been so much interest in young females since psychologist Mary Pipher chronicled anorexics and suicide victims in her 1994 bestseller, Reviving Ophelia."--The Washington Post

    "Provocative . . . Cathartic to any teen or parent trying to find company . . . it will sound depressingly familiar to any girl with a pulse."--Detroit Free Press

    "Encourages girls to address one another when they feel angry or jealous, rather than engage in the rumor mill."--Chicago Tribune

    "Peels away the smiley surfaces of adolescent female society to expose one of girlhood's dark secrets: the vicious psychological warfare waged every day in the halls of our . . . schools."--San Francisco Chronicle

    "Passionate and beautifully written. A significant contribution to our understanding of the psychology of girls." —Michael Thompson, co-author of Raising Cain

    An American School Board Journal Notable Book in Education

You May Also Enjoy