"When you teach your daughter, explicitly or by passive rejection, that she must ignore her outrage, that she must be kind and accepting to the point of not defending herself or other people, that she must not rock the boat for any reason, you are not strengthening her pro-social sense; you are damaging it—and the first person she will stop protecting is herself."
Martha Stout

Henri Cartier Bresson

In the FLDS, they called it "keeping sweet".

In Christian fundamentalism, it was "keeping a quiet, submissive spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight".

There's nothing wrong with being kind. Or being quiet. Or being submissive. Or being sweet. Sometimes. Men too, not *just* women.

There is something wrong with using virtue as a tool to keep women in their place. There's something wrong with socializing girls to be passive, to doubt their inner voice, to be uncomfortable wielding their own personal power, to be apologetic for taking up space on their planet, for occupying their real estate.

There is something wrong with the way that down through the generations, and *especially* in Christian fundamentalism, we send our girls the message that they need to stay under the radar, heads under the parapet, and not paint targets on themselves, by being all they really are, and by being vocal, assertive, activist and loud. Because deep in our DNA, we know what happened to women who attract notice, who stand out, who speak up, who lead the way, who make revolution, who won't be silenced, who stand strong, who engage with their inner wisdom and who employ the gifts God has bestowed on them.