Children's Beauty Pageants: The Case for Regulation

Introduction

Given the tabloid attention devoted to children's beauty pageants, the question of whether children should be allowed to participate in these venues has received increased scrutiny. Proponents of pageants claim that they boost participants' self-esteem or, at worst, do no harm. However, this essay contends that far from being harmless talent competitions, children's beauty pageants raise real questions about children's consent and troubling concerns about the use of children as spectacles of entertainment. They should be subject to increased regulation, if not an outright ban.

Children's beauty pageants have been controversial since their inception in the 1960s, and the industry has existed almost as long as its adult counterparts. The industry is virtually unregulated — unlike, for example, children who act in sitcoms or films, who are subject to child labor laws. "According to the Attorney General of the Department of Justice in California, 'there is no law that prescribes how a pageant must be managed; the rules are set by each contest promoter'" (Nussbaum, "Children").

The Controversy Over Child Beauty Pageants

Opposition to children's beauty pageants comes from a wide variety of sources. First and foremost, many feminists are outraged at a spectacle in which little girls are judged for their looks rather than for talent or internal qualities like sportsmanship and intelligence. Many competitions feature very young and impressionable children — some as young as two — although age ranges can extend to girls as old as middle-school age. "The competition is usually composed of different categories, namely talent, casual wear, long gown or evening wear, sportswear, and a question-and-answer portion. Child contestants can wear makeup, showcase different hairstyles, and wear fitted outfits" ("Child Beauty Pageant Statistics," 2014). The emphasis on dress and makeup can create a highly sexualized image of the child, which many find objectionable, and sends young girls the message that appearance is more important than internal qualities.

According to Karen Kataline, "a mental health professional near Denver who participated in child pageants in the 1960s," while "I'm not against children singing and dancing on stage, … you want them to sing and dance and perform in age-appropriate ways. Today, we've pushed the envelope to ridiculous degrees" (Healey, "Could Child Beauty Pageants"). There are reports of children being denied adequate sleep to preserve their hairdos and forced to wear artificial teeth to conceal the natural loss of baby teeth — clear evidence that age-appropriate behavior is not encouraged within the pageant context. Kataline herself is the author of Fatlash!: Food Police and the Fear of Thin — A Cautionary Tale, in which she describes the eating disorder she developed after being forced to participate in pageants as a young girl. Involuntary sexualization at a young age can have a lasting impact, causing girls either to believe their only worth lies in their sexuality or to view normal sexual development in maturity as something to hide (Renold & Ringrose 389).

Why Pageants Harm Children: Three Core Arguments

Even though they may appear to be harmless fun, child beauty pageants exploit children for adults' ego and entertainment. Three arguments support this position.

First and foremost, child beauty pageants require children to perform in ways that are not healthy to their development, long before they have the ability to consent to such participation. Children who take part in these pageants often endure painful beauty rituals with a questionable effect on their health — including being given soda to stay awake during late-night preparations, grueling dance practices, and tanning (Cartwright, "Child Beauty Pageants"). Unlike adults, they are not old enough to make a reasoned decision weighing the risks and benefits of prioritizing pageants over other aspects of their lives, such as socializing with friends, playing sports, or studying. And unlike other forms of entertainment such as acting or school sports, pageants are largely unregulated, with no limits on hours of work or practice to keep the activity within an appropriate portion of a child's life.

Second, pageants over-sexualize children. Little girls are not even judged on their natural, childlike qualities but rather on the extent to which they are encouraged to mimic adult mannerisms in ways that are often unnatural and inappropriate. This sends a damaging message both to the girls themselves and to broader society about how young girls should perceive themselves. Pageants are already scandal-plagued, thanks to the legacy of the killing of JonBenét Ramsey and the reality television program Toddlers and Tiaras; continuing to impose this kind of childhood experience on another generation is, at best, deeply questionable ("Top Ten Beauty Pageant Scandals," Time Magazine).

Third, the existence of pageants perpetuates what is often called the Beauty Myth — the commodification of female beauty and the idea that women should be valued only according to their physical attributes in the eyes of men. As Naomi Wolf argues, "Men are visually aroused by women's bodies and less sensitive to their arousal by women's personalities because they are trained early into that response, while women are less visually aroused and more emotionally aroused because that is their training" (Wolf 152). Pageants reinforce this conditioning from the earliest possible age.

Conclusion

The law must step in to protect the weakest and most vulnerable members of society, including its children. Children involved in beauty pageants do not have the agency or voice to articulate their own needs. Although parents generally have the right to determine what is best for their children, society also places limits on children's participation in work and education to ensure they are treated in an age-appropriate manner. Placing restrictions on pageants — including the types of performances and beauty practices children may be subjected to — seems not only reasonable but necessary in light of the documented abuses. Until stronger regulation is in place, children in this industry remain uniquely and unjustifiably vulnerable.