BACK TO SPRIG HOME
Sprig Magazine publishes two articles per month, written by our wonderful team of freelance writers.
THE TEAM/WRITERS
BACK TO SPRIG HOME
Sprig Magazine publishes two articles per month, written by our wonderful team of freelance writers.
THE TEAM/WRITERS
Are you a “Thought Daughter”, or are you just a person with hobbies?
By Isabella Calvino
She/Her
Originally from the Gold Coast, Isabella “Belle” Calvino is a barista, bartender and student of philosophy and creative writing. Now based in Meanjin, she adores being involved with the local arts scene, and when she’s not pulling shots or writing essays, you’re likely to find her at any local markets, art shows and music gigs.
https://substack.com/@grrrlsgerms
Edited by Alexcea Apostolakis
associate editor
she/her
From Aotearoa now based in Naarm, Alexcea joins the team as an Associate Editor at Sprig Magazine. With a keen interest in art, literature, fashion, and music, she comes from a background in painting and poetry, along with a degree in Art History. She has a genuine passion for community building and creating spaces to platform emerging artists of varying disciplines. When she is not writing or painting, she can be found in her happy place- the crowd of a local punk show.
If you haven’t read all these books, alongside their respective authors’ other works (and some), then unfortunately you just don’t fit into the potentially pretentious, highly educated, and sincerely emotional “thought daughter” niche.
Originating from the Gay Son or Thot Daughter trend, in which many on TikTok described their parents as getting confused and opting for a secret third option- ‘Thought Daughter’. At first it may appear progressive. Rather than shaming the child for same-sex attraction or “promiscuous” tendencies, they are instead “afflicted” by the burden of thinking too much. Yet this further perpetuates that women can only be a two-dimensional archetype rather than real people with thoughts and feelings. From this, the trend took off - reading lists consisting of books, essays and articles were compiled, playlists were curated, wardrobes were collected, all to curate an unattainable visual embodiment of the Thought Daughter.
Thought mothers (influencers) were preaching to their thought daughters (followers) how a certain book or album or movie helped them think differently about life, and posted “honest” and “relatable” accounts of their struggles with mental illnesses such as anxiety and depression.
There is nothing inherently bad about promoting discussions around mental health, sharing art and knowledge, and destigmatising mental health issues. However, the issue arises when these important topics and real struggles are conflated to a trend that can be used to create content for the purpose of consumerism and glamorising mental illness.
So where did this all begin?
The “thought daughter” trend evolved from the questionable “gay son or thot daughter” trend in which people were asked to choose between having either a gay son or a thot (analogous to whore, meant to demean women for enjoying sexual pursuits) daughter, within a predominantly derogatory context. This exemplifies that the supposed worst thing one can do is be attracted to men, and thus shames both gay men and straight/mspec women alike. Both homosexuality and women’s license in their own sexuality have been incredibly stigmatised for centuries, and only within the past few decades has it become less taboo to discuss or participate in these activities. I would argue that the majority of society remains incredibly prejudiced against promiscuous - or sexually emboldened - women. God forbid women enjoy anything.
The emergence of the “thought daughter”, as a homophonic progression of “thot daughter”, at first seems to give the women it refers to more license. At a surface level, it defines them as a thoughtful person, rather than restricting them to a label based off of their sexuality alone. It appears to personify rather than objectify, to bring depth and character rather than implying their life revolves around sex. As the trend took off, it became apparent that to be a “thought daughter”, one must learn the curriculum, wear the uniform, and consume as much as possible in order to appear the most niche, most intellectual, and most deep.
To be a woman is to perform.
This classification of women is not unique. We are often exposed to trends in which women who enjoy certain activities or participate in certain hobbies are also expected to walk, talk and think a certain way. Essentially, to be a woman is to confine your identity into consumable portions in which you can be easily defined, and thus consumed. Women can never just be. We have to attain a specific set of skills, beliefs, attitudes, interests; whilst being careful not to appear too multifaceted and contradictory. However, most ‘importantly’- we must always, ALWAYS be desirable.Women are judged for simply existing; a woman out in a tracksuit and t-shirt doing her groceries is more likely to face scrutiny than a man running his errands in the same attire. Women must always be presentable and put together, because the male gaze expects it and the male voice we’re conditioned to have inside our head tells us that if we “slack off” we will be judged for it. This constant pressure to perform, to present ourselves a certain way, becomes overwhelming, resulting in the proliferation of trends like “thought daughter”. If we can identify our genuine personality traits and interests into an archetype, and if the criteria necessitates a certain behavioural set and apparel, it becomes less exhausting to actively present these consciously; instead opting for the choice that has already been made for us. Women only need to play the part rather than writing the script ourselves.
The thought daughter thus provides women with a go-to façade against the patriarchy. A façade which feels genuine and aligns with personal interests, yet is removed from the self because of its lack of capacity to accommodate for nuance and individuality. If the “thought daughter” is unique, why is it that all thought daughters share the same interests, anxieties, and personality? Whilst it is easy to find a label with the accompanying mask that matches one’s personality traits, it doesn’t hide the misogynistic truth - women are not enough without a prescribed label. In the act of distinguishing ourselves from the rest, we become the “thought daughter”, defying the prescribed (and assumed) position of the non-intellectual woman.
To feel is to suffer.
A key trait of the Thought Daughter trope, as paraded on the internet, is the tendency to stay up late overthinking, to overanalyse, to be sensitive and to cry easily. Whilst it is obviously important to destigmatise discussions on mental illness and to applaud vulnerability, the way in which it has become a quintessential part of the thought daughter aesthetic is problematic. Depression and anxiety are dangerous conditions - no, you are not “just a girl” for having panic attacks on your bathroom floor at night, and no, you should not be finding comfort in The Bell Jar’s Esther Greenwood. Countless memes are collected on women’s Pinterest boards with pictures of Plath photoshopped next to an oven, with captions alluding to their own desire to mimic her fate.
This romanticisation of suffering can be compared to that of the early 2010s eating disorder Tumblr scene, where Cassie from Skins perpetuated gifsets and a plethora of posts went up under the tag #thinspo. These dangerous “ideals” are exposed to thousands of women and girls, whose impressionable minds may not comprehend that no matter how “relatable” their mental illnesses are portrayed by their favourite influencers, they should be seeking actual professional help. Rather, we are confronted by the futile alternative - reposting TikToks claiming they wish to sleep their life away (See: My Year Of Rest And Relaxation), among other unsettling examples.
Ultimately, depression and anxiety are integral to the Thought Daughter archetype. Sadness, loneliness, and emotional volatility are associated with depth and sensitivity. Intellectualism and intelligence are replaced with overthinking and mistrust in the thought daughter’s realm. Anxious overthinking cannot be comparable to deep thinking. The idealisation of persistent negative emotion should not and does not contribute to the depth of one's character. By proxy, the Thought Daughters need to feel intellectually and emotionally superior to her peers makes the association between intelligence and misery becomes highly dangerous.
To identify is to consume.
The Thought Daughter turns interests such as reading and writing and multi-dimensional aspects of the self such as thinking and feeling into a one-dimensional brand complete with a shopping list. As well as being an individual with hobbies and depth, you must also conform to the prescribed aesthetic. A complete contradiction, an unattainable goalpost. Thought Daughters must consume the right media (or enough of it), - read the set curriculum of books, watch the right films, and curate their playlists to the quintessential sad girl soundtrack (i.e. Mitski, Phoebe Bridgers, Fiona Apple, and the like). Touting aloofness whilst also maintaining composure. Dressing the part is imperative of course (for what is a woman without her looks). The uniform is chic yet comfortable, modest but not uptight. And only once you have checked enough points off the ever growing list, can you truly identify as the Thought Daughter.
Societies' persistent need to compartmentalise identities through trends is a clear product of capitalism. The relation of consumer culture and sense of identity leads to what Marxists recognise as a feeling of alienation. Our sense of self is tied to capital gain, enabling us with the opportunity to purchase the next “Big Thing” which we are told we need, to finally become the ultimate “cool girl”, or whatever manifestation of identity you are being sold.
It is assumed that someone is less intellectual, less of a “thought daughter”, if they haven’t read the so-called ‘essential reading list’ of high-brow white literature? To claim an identity, you must consume. Reading is no longer done in the pursuit of knowledge, or entertainment, or relaxation; rather, it becomes something to tick off in order to fit in. There used to be a time in which you would pick up a book and read it purely because the synopsis was intriguing, not because you saw the Thought Daughter’s essential bookshelf list online. It becomes consumption for the sake of consumption. The pure fact that the Thought Daughter is an online trend points to its roots as a consumerist identity. The creation of these identities leads us away from actual self-discovery and experimentation, thus consumerism facilitates the death of individuality.
Whilst I’m curious to see what type of “girl” the internet finds most desirable next, there will come a point at which we run out of archetypes and either (hopefully!) individuality will take over, or we will have a global identity crisis. Fangirl, art hoe, tomato girl, gamer girl, pink Pilates princess… where does this end? Either we let this consumerist need to label and categorise our personalities continue, or we recognise the misogyny in classifying “types of girls”. Although the Thought Daughter is less sexualised and pertains to a sense of autonomy, the trope itself is no less sexist than any of its predecessors. I ask, to all you “thought daughters” out there: will you reconsider this label, and accept these traits as only a part of your multifaceted self?