Why We Need to Rethink Our Reaction to “Girly” Extracurriculars
When a high school sophomore recently told me she felt “grossed out” by joining her school’s dance team because it’s seen as “too girly,” it sparked a bigger conversation. Why do activities traditionally associated with girls—like cheerleading, baking clubs, or fashion design workshops—trigger eye-rolls or even disdain? This discomfort says less about the activities themselves and more about the outdated stereotypes we’ve attached to them. Let’s unpack why dismissing “girly” hobbies harms everyone and how reframing these activities can empower students.
The Problem with Labeling Activities as “Too Girly”
From a young age, girls are subtly steered toward certain hobbies: arts and crafts, dance, or volunteering. Boys, meanwhile, are nudged toward robotics, sports, or coding clubs. These divisions seem harmless, but they reinforce rigid gender roles. When activities labeled “for girls” are mocked or undervalued, it sends a damaging message: What girls enjoy is inherently less valuable.
Take cheerleading, for example. Critics often reduce it to “just waving pom-poms,” ignoring the athleticism, teamwork, and leadership required. Similarly, fashion design clubs teach practical skills like budgeting, creativity, and entrepreneurship—tools applicable to careers in marketing, engineering, or product development. Yet, these activities are often dismissed as frivolous because they’re perceived as feminine.
This bias doesn’t just affect girls. Boys who express interest in “girly” hobbies face ridicule, too. A middle schooler passionate about baking might hide his interest to avoid bullying. By devaluing activities based on gender associations, we limit all kids’ opportunities to explore their passions.
Where Does the Disgust Come From?
Historically, activities tied to femininity have been culturally downgraded. Domestic skills like sewing or cooking were once survival necessities, but as societies industrialized, “women’s work” became synonymous with inferiority. Meanwhile, male-dominated fields like STEM or politics were elevated as intellectually superior.
These attitudes linger today. A 2022 study by the National Education Association found that school clubs focused on “soft skills” (e.g., flower arranging, knitting) receive 30% less funding than STEM or sports programs. Even parents often discourage daughters from “girly” activities, fearing they’ll be pigeonholed. One mom confessed, “I pushed my daughter toward robotics because I didn’t want people to think she wasn’t serious.”
The irony? Skills from “girly” extracurriculars are highly transferable. Dance improves spatial reasoning—a key component of math and physics. Volunteering builds empathy and communication, critical for leadership roles. When we dismiss these activities, we overlook their potential to prepare kids for diverse careers.
How Stereotypes Limit Potential
When girls internalize the idea that “girly = lesser,” they start self-editing. A high school junior shared, “I quit theater tech because my friends said it was for ‘artsy girls who can’t do real tech.’ Now I regret it—I loved building sets.” Conversely, girls who embrace “masculine” hobbies often face pushback. A girl in a coding club recalled boys asking, “Why are you here? Shouldn’t you be doing makeup tutorials?”
This policing creates a lose-lose scenario. Girls feel pressured to reject interests that align with their strengths, while boys miss out on hobbies that could foster creativity or emotional intelligence. Schools inadvertently reinforce this by segregating clubs. Why isn’t there a “Design and Engineering” club that merges fashion and tech? Or a “Leadership Through Service” program combining volunteer work with project management?
Redefining Value Beyond Gender
The solution isn’t to eliminate traditionally feminine activities but to redefine their worth. Here’s how:
1. Highlight Cross-Disciplinary Skills
Advisors should connect extracurriculars to real-world applications. A knitting club isn’t just about scarves—it’s about geometry (pattern design), chemistry (dyeing fabrics), and business (selling products online). Frame these clubs as labs for innovation.
2. Encourage Hybrid Clubs
Merge “masculine” and “feminine” interests. A cooking club could partner with the chemistry class to explore food science. A dance team might collaborate with the coding club to create digital choreography tools.
3. Celebrate Role Models
Introduce students to professionals who blend “girly” skills with technical expertise. Think of a surgeon who credits her embroidery hobby for improving her surgical precision or a CEO who uses theater training to ace negotiations.
4. Challenge Language
Replace phrases like “that’s so girly” with curiosity. Ask, “What do you enjoy about that activity?” instead of assuming it’s frivolous.
The Bigger Picture
Dismissing “girly” extracurriculars isn’t just about fairness—it’s about wasting potential. When we equate femininity with weakness, we teach kids to devalue half the human experience. Imagine if Marie Curie had abandoned her love of reading (a “soft” hobby) to focus solely on lab work. Or if Steve Jobs hadn’t credited calligraphy classes (an “artsy” pursuit) for inspiring Apple’s typography.
Extracurriculars shouldn’t be battlegrounds for gender politics. They’re playgrounds for curiosity. Let’s stop judging activities by who traditionally does them and start asking, “What can we learn here?” Whether it’s a makeup tutorial or a math Olympiad, every hobby offers a chance to grow—if we’re open to seeing it.
The next time someone calls an activity “too girly,” flip the script. Instead of cringing, say: “Tell me more. What makes it exciting?” You might just uncover a future innovator—or rethink your own biases.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » Why We Need to Rethink Our Reaction to “Girly” Extracurriculars