Isabel -- yes to new language! I think this points, once again, to our inability as a culture/society, to find genuine ways of talking about women's experiences/desires/aspirations without filtering ourselves through a masculine lens.
runcarla -- "garçon manque" -- that does get freudian awfully fast, doesn't it?
CWS -- that Julie Swanson piece is great. I like her willingness to play around with new terminology.
Astrid -- I got labelled a tomboy as a kid without being particularly athletic or outdoorsy (that all came much later). I was just bookish and didn't wear pink or skirts!
El Cee -- it's interesting, for so long women who wanted to be outdoorsy basically had to wear men's clothing, or miniaturized versions of it. Now the womens athletic wear industry has exploded and you can do basically anything in a pink skirt if you want. I think as activities become less gender-exclusive, the "tomboy" designation becomes less relevant.
Deb -- two babies in the woods elevates you way beyond tomboy status -- no guy could manage that!
Suz -- your daughter is lucky to have you. We work pretty hard not to inadvertently push masculine norms on our almost 3 year old son. He likes pink and purple, and recently told me that he'd like a dress, because he doesn't have any yet! I'm a little baffled by the prevalence of hypermasculine buzzcuts and camo and such on very little boys -- just aesthetically I don't find it appealing, not to mention too much cultural/political baggage for young children to shoulder. I grew up with parents who never really pushed traditional gender roles too hard. I did not, as a child, associate women with make-up, jewelry, heels, fragility, etc. because so few of my female relatives embody that concept of femininity. So I never had the feeling that my gender didn't have room for me.
I, too, find "garçonne" somewhat more appealing - but it's still using maleness/masculinity as the reference point. Big takeaway: finding non-binary ways to talk about personal style is very difficult!
