friends both to enhance her own power and as a source of vicious amusement. Mia’s lack of loyalty to those outside the girls’ group meant that the other ‘cool children did not usually defend her. Indeed, it sometimes appeared that she was used as a for others whom one did not dare to challenge. For example, ‘stand-in’ when everyone laughed at Titanic when he fell over while running, he shouted up Mia’ rather than confronting the rest of the class. Similarly, in ‘shut conversation, lower status children might move from speaking critically about the powerful Kelly, to discussing how much they disliked Mia, a much safer target. Overall, Mia’s strong investment in girl’ discourse and constant ‘cool striving to be part of the girls’ group put her in the most problematic ‘cool position of all the girls in the class. It left her open to exclusion from all sides, because her tendency to take all secrets and disputes to Kelly made her distrusted by the other children (Sedano, 2012). Allowing herself to do more powerful girls’ work’ in bullying or setting up others at Kelly’s request ‘dirty meant that she was frequently blamed for causing trouble, while, her relative lack of power meant that other children, even the girls’, felt that they could ‘nice condemn or reject her with impunity. Her public failure, in the face of public striving, to be accepted by the girls’ clique gave her a pariah status which ‘cool left her open to ridicule from all sides. While, unlike the girls’, she could at ‘nice times openly resist and fight back, particularly against the boys, her constant desire to please Kelly, in the face of Kelly’s frequent rejection, made her school life frequently miserable, if occasionally exciting. Taken all together, her experiences suggest that, for a girl, being a on the extreme fringes of ‘wannabe’,
friends both to enhance her own power and as a source of vicious amusement. Mia’s lack of loyalty to those outside the ‘cool girls’ group meant that the other children did not usually defend her. Indeed, it sometimes appeared that she was used as a ‘stand-in’ for others whom one did not dare to challenge. For example, when everyone laughed at Titanic when he fell over while running, he shouted ‘shut up Mia’ rather than confronting the rest of the class. Similarly, in conversation, lower status children might move from speaking critically about the powerful Kelly, to discussing how much they disliked Mia, a much safer target. Overall, Mia’s strong investment in ‘cool girl’ discourse and constant striving to be part of the ‘cool girls’ group put her in the most problematic position of all the girls in the class. It left her open to exclusion from all sides, because her tendency to take all secrets and disputes to Kelly made her distrusted by the other children (Sedano, 2012). Allowing herself to do more powerful girls’ ‘dirty work’ in bullying or setting up others at Kelly’s request meant that she was frequently blamed for causing trouble, while, her relative lack of power meant that other children, even the ‘nice girls’, felt that they could condemn or reject her with impunity. Her public failure, in the face of public striving, to be accepted by the ‘cool girls’ clique gave her a pariah status which left her open to ridicule from all sides. While, unlike the ‘nice girls’, she could at times openly resist and fight back, particularly against the boys, her constant desire to please Kelly, in the face of Kelly’s frequent rejection, made her school life frequently miserable, if occasionally exciting. Taken all together, her experiences suggest that, for a girl, being a ‘wannabe’, on the extreme fringes of
Being%20%E2%80%98nice%E2%80%99%20or%20being%20%E2%80%98normal%E2%80%99%20final.docx