The mother of
a 15-year-old girl
by Thelma Barsy
Last week we had an old-fashioned melodrama- at
our house. My daughter Anne was the fair
maiden. Jim, her too-faithful beau, was the
hero. Needless to say, I was the villain. Briefly, the
plot involved a girl and boy caught in a major crisis
created by her mother, who said, "I honestly believe
that 15-year-old girls shouldn't go steady!"
In case your children are not teen-agers, let me tell
you, them's fightin' words! And they certainly created
a verbal free-for-all in our home.
"But Mother," Anne protested, "you'll never under
stand. You're too old-fashioned. I know all about you
and Daddy, and how you dated dozens of others be
fore you went steady. But times are different now.
This happens to be 1958!"
Anne is right. Things were different then, for teen
age fashions do change in dating as well as in clothes.
But people children and their parents stay pretty
much the same despite the calendar. I'm as concerned
about Anne's happiness and her future this year as
my mother was about mine 20 years ago. That's why
I've given a lot of thought to this subject, but I still
takes a long, hard look
at dating by young people and says:
66 Teem -
1 o
Having a "steady" makes life more com
fortable for teen-agers. Neither has
to worry about dates or face problems
of adjusting to series of friends. But
parents wonder, "Are they ready for it?"
can't see where steady dating is going to do Anne or
any other young person any good.
Many parents feel that teen-agers should be allowed
to make these decisions by themselves. They believe
that a wise mother might better bite her tongue,
temper her counsel, and look upon the positive side
of steady dating. I certainly agree that youngsters
should be given all the independence they can handle,
but this is a problem that requires more experience
than Anne has had, and thus necessitates more guid
ance than she would like. I would be a delinquent
parent if I turned my back when she needs my help.
Anne scoffs at my method. "That was all very ad
venturous," she laughs, "but why should I go out
with as many drips as you did? After all, I've already
found the boy I like."
She yawns politely when I tell her about the latter
day status of my dream dates. The most glamorous
boy of my teens is currently a sad, spoiled bachelor
to whom life was too good too early. The boy with
whom I had "everything in common" is presently a
penny-pinching, tyrannical husband who neither
votes, prays, nor pays his bills. And the "drips" the
clumsy, silent, hopeless ones have in several in-
Going steady is simply a perverse way of solving the
whole question of popularity. It's the style, and if
you're fashionable you do it.
I'd probably feel differently if Anne had been dating
, a variety of boys, or if she were 18 or over. Perhaps
then I would bite my tongue and temper my counsel.
But even mothers of older teen-agers have their
worries on the subject. One old friend recently told
me that she had urged her daughter to pick a woman's
college. Why? "Because I thought Grace would have
freedom to meet more different boys. She could date
ten men without somebody saying, 'Hands off. She's
o
"But Mother," my daughter asks, "Don't you want
me to be happy? .Would you rather have me sitting
home alone, pining for the phone to ring, or going out
with a series of drips and stuttering around for suit
able small talk?" -
The answers to those questions are obvious. I know
how important it is for teen-agers to feel at home with
their friends to belong. I know, too, that having a
"steady" makes life more comfortable for Anne and
for Jim. Neither of them has Saturday-night woes
about where the next date will come from, nor must
they face the difficulty of adjusting to a variety of
awkward teen-agers.
But is this semisecurity reason enough for steady
dating? The answer in my book an old-fashioned
one, to be sure is no.
QpiNG steady means different things at various ages
and stages. My 11-year-old son, for instance,
travels steadily with a group of girls and bbys.
That is steadily until baseball season starts; then the
girls are dropped as fast as a hot poker. My 13-year-old
daughter has a steady suitor, too a pal who
helps her with algebra. As she says, "All of us kids
go steady for a week or two."
But with Anne and many other teen-agers in high
school, steady has a far different meaning. Jim is it,
the real thing, the comfortable, ever-present partner
to whom Anne has pledged her life, liberty, and pur
suit of happiness.
She walks to school with him, lunches and studies
with him, accompanies him to movies and picnics and
dances. Make no mistake about Jim. We like him. It
would be hard not to, for he is a handsome boy with
a good mind and a suitable respect for oldsters like
me. And as Anne says, "We've everything in common:
music, sports, chocolate sodas. Why even our fathers
are alike college, Methodist, and Republican."
The very description makes me shudder. Anne
sounds like a prospective wife rather than a promising
date. And it bothers me plenty that at 15 young people
should be acting the role of old marrieds faithful,
settled, steady, and stuffy.
I can't remember looking for a date whose father
voted or prayed the way mine did. I can't remember
caring whether my dates and I had Gary Cooper or
banana splits in common. What mattered then, and I
think still should, was that there were dates and the
more the merrier. By playing the field and having
fun, I learned the traits, the personality plusses, that
I eventually wanted to find in a husband. I learned
this by a process of selection and elimination.
stances developed into remarkable men. In short,
without casting doubts on Jim's future, what looks
divine at 15 can look dismal 15 or 20 years later.
'm not only thinking of marriage when I object to
steady dating. I'm fairly sure and sociolo
gists back me up that constant companionship
at too early an age is causing an alarming increase
in petting and premarital intimacy. Also I'm worried
about Anne's personal development, or lack of it, for
it seems to me that she is curtailing her experience
and depriving herself of the joys of being young.
Sure, Jim is around. Anne doesn't have to worry
about an invitation to the Junior Prom. Jim needn't
scurry for a date, secretly fearing possible rejection.
They(know beforehand they'll go together. And once
there, neither will be a wallflower, for today's rigid
adolescent code dictates that they will dance the
evening awafy together. No stags. No cut-ins. No
programs or swaps. A recent' poll of teen-agers
showed that 42 percent approved this pattern, but
what of the rest? More than a few must find the
evening long when it's spent with someone a little less
than the man or girl of their dreams.
All this "togetherness" strikes me as dead wrong.
Anne and Jim are entirely too comfortable, too secure.
Though adolescence may have its miseries, one of its
advantages is that it is a time to practice at adult
behavior, to learn from the bumps about oneself,
other people, and about life. What have Anne and
Jim learned about themselves, about gaining poise to
meet new people and new situations? Almost nothing.
Anne may be an authority on one boy, yet she knows
nothing about boys in general. She is never asked to
improve her personality, add luster to her line, sparkle
to her life. Jim likes her just as she is. And as she is,
she's a sweet, unpoised, immature girl of 15.
I've known many girls who suffered through a pain
ful adolescence and emerged as attractive, sought
after women. Why? Simply because the lumps and
bumps of growing forced them to do some self
analysis and to develop all their resources. In the
long haul they've had far more fun than those who
dimply got along and found the going too smooth.
Ae parents are partially at fault, I'm sure, for
we've put tremendous emphasis on popular
ity. To be liked at any price is the way our
children have interpreted our advice. I think it is
simply the desire to belong, to win approval, which .
makes girls "go too far" and makes boys feel in
adequate with anything less than the prettiest girls.
dated Fred more than once; she's claimed'."
Another college girl I know went to a coeducational
school and objected violently to the restrictions '
placed on her by the college's pattern of steady dating.
"How," she wrote angrily, "is a girl supposed to meet
new and attractive people when everyone around is
already paired off?" -
Anne isn't experienced, and she isn't 18, and sjie's
living at home where I can see day by day what she's
missing. I blame myself, too. I think that a Jot of us
parents miss our chances. We should help our chil
dren meet the normal bruises of adolescence by sug
gesting ways they can plan their fun. If young teen
agers find formal affairs trying, we should encourage
simpler parties. Recently a friend said, "You know,
at this age I, find costumes, even barefoot parties,
help break the ice. The kids relax and have fun."
Most of us are too afraid to interfere. We let our
teen-agers work out their own parties and arrange
ments when maybe they'd really like some advice or
inspiration. We stand back, reluctant to say "no,"
even when we know they're wrong. We've forgotten
that being 13 or 15 or 17 is hard, but that a warm and
understanding family helps. We fail or fear to speak
up with suggestions, for the melodrama that follows
sometimes is hardly worth the price.
. Certainly I'm out of ouch and out of date in Anne's
eyes. Surely she laughs at my old-fashioned notions
of teen-age fun. But perhaps it would interest Anne
and a lot of other teen-agers to hear that Marilyn
Van Derbur, a 20-year-old Denverite, is on my side.
Recently Miss Van Derbur told a group of report
ers, "I ve always dated
several boys at a time, and I
think it's the only way to
find the right husband. The
teens are an especially im
portant time to meet as
many persons as possible."
I may be old-hat, but
Marilyn Van Derbur is none
other than the very modern
Miss America of 1958. -
Hi
urn ;
Ml
Marilyn plays the field.
(Family Weekly welcomes your views on steady
dating by teen-agers, in 300 words or less. Letters
must be postmarked no later than midnight, Feb'. 3.
If we print your letter, you will be paid $25. Letters
must be signed but names will be withheld on request.
Letters cannot be returned. Address contributions to
Dating, Family Weekly, 179 N. Michigan Ave., Chi
cago 1, 111.)
Family Weekly, January 26, 1958
7