Eliana Steinberg
Life Editor
At Milken, I’m taught that everyone is created in God’s image; but I don’t want to learn more about my image at school.
Last week, Kayla McGee, a celebrity stylist, addressed the senior class during a class meeting held in the theatre. Brought in to prepare us for career day, McGee began her presentation with a simple thesis statement: Appearance matters.
Clicking through slides of various before-and-after pictures of TV actors and actresses, McGee pointed out their sartorial faults and fashion missteps. She presented the transformation of Katherine Heigl, from “classic girl next door” in an informal skirt and sweater combo, to “leading lady” in a form-fitting red dress. This makeover helped Katherine Heigl reel in roles such as Holly in the 2010 Blockbuster, Life As We Know It, we were told.
I’m all for US Weekly’s “Who Wore It Better?” spread, but this discussion was ill suited at 9 AM in our Robert Margolis Theatre. A school function isn’t the appropriate medium for an authority figure to instill fashion advice.
However, her demonstration was not only offensive in that she advocated too ardently the importance of one’s outer beauty, but also in that her language perpetuated feelings of insecurity and self-doubt. She was the anti-Motivational Speaker. As 17 and 18 year-olds, we are no strangers to criticism from others, let alone from ourselves. We don’t need an adult to stand in front of us to verbalize that our shoes aren’t right or that we can’t pull off horizontal stripes.
It became weird when she displayed a picture of an 18 year-old girl in a bright button-up shirt and bowtie. She challenged us to criticize the girl’s outfit, to point out what was “wrong” with her appearance. Classmates articulated that her style was “quirky” and “creative.” McGee wanted more.
“You guys are so nice,” she laughed.
At this point, my eyes couldn’t roll further back into my head. What did she expect? Were we supposed to stand up amongst all of our classmates and proclaim that this teenager projected onto the screen was “ugly” or had a “bad” fashion sense? Do we need to so emphatically voice our disapproval of another’s image for the sake of our learning?
An adult asking a group of teenagers to overtly judge another’s appearance, especially in a school setting, is strange and just tactless. In an environment where we value so deeply the principals of acceptance and love of learning, this conversation was out of place. I wasn’t deeply disturbed by the premise of her argument; we’ve all been pelted with unrealistic and noxious messages about our appearance since we were introduced to the television. But for an educator to be the one to further this already bubbling epidemic, and at the school where “mensch” is built into our vernacular, is just unnecessary.
Rachel kk • Feb 10, 2012 at 10:23 pm
loved this article, my thoughts and feelings exactly.
I love false statistics • Feb 8, 2012 at 10:45 am
@Syntax and Grammar Change Everything
I wanted to say that I thoroughly enjoyed your comment about false statistics. Anonymous number one seems to have opinions that come from a fantastical place. I would also like to share my opinion of this person post, that opinion is defined by words including idiotic and ridiculous. I would encourage the anonymous member of our community to be more forthright when making accusations that borderline on stupidity(anonymous # 1).
Syntax and Grammar Change Everything • Feb 8, 2012 at 12:36 am
@Annonymous (the first one):
Let’s break down your comment piece by piece. Here are all the reasons I like your comment:
“Not only do I find this article embarrassing, but also very inappropriate.” To whom do you find it embarrassing? Eliana isn’t embarrassed by it, and neither is the ROAR.
“As a long time reader of Milken’s Roar, this piece is not consistent with what the community regularly reads.” This implied that, for a non-long-time reader of the ROAR, this piece may, in fact, be consistent with what the community regularly reads. If so, then why even differentiate between the two groups? Why de-value members of our community who are NOT long-time readers of the ROAR. Additionally, are you a “long time reader,” as you say, or are you a “long-time reader”? The two have different connotations. The former would imply that you spend a “long time” reading the ROAR, while the latter would suggest that you have been reading it for a long time. It seems to me that you spend a lot of time reading the ROAR, which is totally cool, I just wanted to make sure we were talking about the same thing.
“Eliana has the right to discuss the guest speaker’s presentation in any fashion, but the negative tone she used was really rude and offensive.” I get it! You used the word “fashion” to comment on a speaker who presented on the topic of fashion. Very clever. The French would call this a “double entendre,” which is pronounced “awn-tawn,” not “en-ten-drey.”
“I personally believe that those who dress better, feel better.” Thank you for clearing this up.
“Isn’t it true that you are more likely to get a job after arriving to an interview in a suit, rather than sweats?” I like that you ask this question because it’s clear that Eliana would answer it with a resounding “no.” Eliana believes that you are more likely to get a job after arriving to an interview with sweats, which is obviously ridiculous. Eliana would definitely say that, by the way.
“The celebrity stylist was merely trying to help us present ourselves in a more appropriate way.” I totally agree, which is why she spent most of her time skewering the aesthetic appearance of a high schooler.
“It is true that 60% of kids at Milken come to school in sweats, baggy sweatshirts, and wet-hair tied in a bun.” This is my favorite part. I like this one because it has been proven: as we all know, 60% of kids come to school in sweats. 60% come to school in baggy sweatshirts. 60%, undoubtedly, come to school with wet-hair tied in a bun. Even the 50% whose hair isn’t long enough to tie their hair in a bun come to school with their hair tied in a bun. This statistic is real and not made up at all, which is why I like it.
“To act as if Ms. McGee tarnished your sense of self esteem and affected your life in some big way, really makes no sense. Let’s be honest, this article is being a little overdramatic.” Perhaps, Anonymous, but so are you.
anonymous • Feb 7, 2012 at 2:41 pm
It’s not about it affecting her life. It’s about the way Milken enacts its mission statement and the messages it sends to its students. In school time, there’s no reason to learn about why it’s important to be image conscious. Those aren’t Milken values.
Obviously, people should look presentable for events like job interviews. But Milken is a college prep school, one that has higher goals than teaching about the merits of a pantsuit. It’s about expanding minds, hearts, etc. Not expanding wardrobes and self-consciousness.
I don’t see what is ‘inappropriate’ about this article. It’s exercising an important role of a school newspaper: to reflect on the moments when a school does and doesn’t reach its mission statement.
Annonymous • Feb 7, 2012 at 10:31 am
Not only do I find this article embarrassing, but also very inappropriate. As a long time reader of Milken’s Roar, this piece is not consistent with what the community regularly reads. Eliana has the right to discuss the guest speaker’s presentation in any fashion, but the negative tone she used was really rude and offensive. I personally believe that those who dress better, feel better. Isn’t it true that you are more likely to get a job after arriving to an interview in a suit, rather than sweats? The celebrity stylist was merely trying to help us present ourselves in a more appropriate way. It is true that 60% of kids at Milken come to school in sweats, baggy sweatshirts, and wet-hair tied in a bun. To act as if Ms. McGee tarnished your sense of self esteem and affected your life in some big way, really makes no sense. Let’s be honest, this article is being a little overdramatic.
Asher Levy • Feb 7, 2012 at 10:12 am
My thoughts exactly. There is little place for such a superficial presentation on our campus.