










































Princesses or Monsters?:
An Anlysis of the Role of the 
Freak Show in Toddlers & Tiaras

INTODUCTION

Fake tans and the smell 
of hairspray fill the hotel 

rooms at a glitzy child beauty 
pageant. Mothers yell about being 
late while their children—the 
contestants—drink Red Bull and 
eat copious amounts of candy 
to help them stay awake during 
the grueling day. It all culminates 
in an hour-long television show 
called Toddlers & Tiaras. Aired first 
in January 2009, the show lasted for six seasons with a total of one hundred 
and seven episodes after it went off the air in October 2013 (Miet). 
  One of TLC’s many reality shows, Toddlers & Tiaras follows three 
contestants as they prepare for and compete in a child beauty pageant. The 
pageant upon which each episode focuses and the contestants it follows 
change with each episode, but there are often contestants who have made 
several appearances on the show, notably Alana Thompson, who even 
inspired the TLC spin-off reality show Here Comes Honey Boo Boo. 
  In a typical episode of Toddlers, which had an average of 1.3 million 
viewers (Miet), half of the episode is spent depicting how each child gets 
ready for a beauty pageant. This includes interviews with both the child 
and parent(s) interspersed with footage of contestants practicing routines, 
getting costumes and dresses ready, getting their nails done, and some even 
applying spray tans. Most of these contestants are between the ages of two 
and nine. The other half of the episode focuses on the pageant itself: the 
arrival of the families, the preparation, the competition, and finally, the 

  -  Lauren Seitz, Ball State University

Abstract
This essay explores a modern-day incarnation 
of the historical freak show: the child beauty 
pageant reality show Toddlers & Tiaras. The author 
draws connections between both freak shows 
and Toddlers’ use of the concepts of normalcy, 
display, and consent, which ultimately reveals 
that shows such as these have a detrimental 
effect on how audiences view young girls, and the 
contestants themselves may feel negative about 
their self-worth and femininity after participating in 
pageants.

Digital Literature Review, vol. 3 (2016). © Ball State University. All Rights Reserved.
Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce critical edition to dlr@bsu.edu.

149



results. Contestants can win a multitude of awards; the top titles often come 
with cash or savings bonds as prizes, some up to $10,000.
  While seen as an entertaining show by many, notably its millions of 
viewers, Toddlers & Tiaras has also accumulated a host of critics, many of 
which note its strong resemblance to the freak show. The historical freak 
show became popular as the Victorian public was fascinated by those 
who did not fit into the social norms of the time. The so-called “normal 
folks” were able to compare themselves to the freaks and feel better about 
the fact that they were not as “abnormal” as those on display. Rosemarie 
Garland Thomson, a leading scholar in disability studies, writes, “The 
freak simultaneously testified to the physical and ideological normalcy of 
the spectator….This determining relation between observer and observed 
was mutually defining and yet unreciprocal, as it imposed on the freak the 
silence, anonymity, and passivity characteristic of objectification” while on 
display (62). While the young girls in Toddlers are also being put on display, 
they are being presented at the other end of the spectrum: the ideal. Three-
year-olds wear copious amounts of makeup and fake teeth while eight-year-
olds get spray tans and perform “sexy” dance routines in skimpy costumes—
all to present themselves as perfect according to societal beauty standards.
  While this aspect of Toddlers may seem to be the opposite of freak 
shows, Lennard Davis explains that, when someone is so ideal—or so far on 
the ideal side of the spectrum—it may actually serve to make them appear 
freakish to their more normal audiences (4). This aspect of Toddlers & Tiaras 
is part of its intense popularity—the audience cannot believe that young 
girls are able to emulate beauty ideals typically reserved for teenagers and 
young women.
  The other popular criticism that the show receives is the argument 
that it unnecessarily sexualizes young girls. From the contestant wearing 
Julia Roberts’s prostitute costume from Pretty Woman to a three-year-old 
wearing Madonna’s iconic cone bra onstage, the show is no stranger to 
controversy (“The Five Biggest Controversies to Hit ‘Toddlers and Tiaras’”). 
In these types of pageants, young girls are expected to embody the same 
type of sexuality that society expects from twenty-year-olds, which can not 
only cause psychological damage in the self-esteem of contestants, but also 
detrimentally influence the way in which society perceives girls (Tamer). 
  In order to further explore the attitudes promoted by child beauty 

Seitz

150



pageants—specifically those featured on Toddlers and Tiaras—I will 
conduct a close analysis of two Toddlers episodes that epitomize the show’s 
similarities—as well as some differences—to the freak show and draw 
conclusions about how these attitudes affect the show’s audience and its 
contestants. I argue that the television show Toddlers & Tiaras functions 
similarly to the historical freak show, which influences the audience’s 
perception of normalcy, while affecting contestants’ self-image with regards 
to femininity and sexuality.

HISTORY OF THE BEAUTY PAGEANT
  The modern beauty pageant was originally the brainchild of none 
other than P.T. Barnum, considered the father of the American freak 
show. Barnum’s inspiration came from the European medieval May Day 
celebrations, which often included competitions involving the selection of 
queens who represented the innocence of young girls. The first of Barnum’s 
pageants was held in England in 1881 and was well received in the United 
States (Friedman). The American version of May Day involved the selection 
of “women to serve as symbols of bounty and community ideals” (“People & 
Events: Origins of the Beauty Pageant”). 
  Beginning in the 1850s, Barnum held “national contests” where “dogs, 
chickens, flowers, and even children were displayed and judged for paying 
audiences” (“People & Events: Origins of the Beauty Pageant”). Baby parades 
and baby contests grew to be a popular form of entertainment with one 
parade in 1893 drawing 30,000 spectators. By the 1929 Coney Island Baby 
Parade, the number of spectators had grown to 500,000. However, because 
of the morals and values of the Victorian era, when Barnum announced 
a similar competition to find beautiful women, it was a huge flop—the 
respectable women of the time would not publicly display themselves 
(Friedman).
  To combat this problem, Barnum pioneered a new system of 
competition: one of photogenic beauty. Women could send in pictures of 
themselves, which would be displayed in Barnum’s museum and voted 
on by museum-goers. For decades, this type of contest was widely used to 
boost morale: “Civic leaders…held newspaper contests to choose women 
that represented the spirit of their locales” (“People & Events: Origins of the 
Beauty Pageant”) to incentivize settlers and businesses to come to their cities 

Seitz

151



and towns. 
  As attitudes about female display changed over time, pageants became 
a more permissible form of entertainment. By the twentieth century, resorts 
held regular pageants as a type of amusement for the ever-expanding 
middle class. In “an effort to lure tourists to stay past Labor Day,” the first-
ever Miss America pageant was held in Atlantic City in 1921 (“People & 
Events: Origins of the Beauty Pageant”). 
  Fast forward to the 1960s, and the modern child beauty pageant was 
in full swing. Known as “American-style beauty pageants,” the Little Miss 
America contest, which searched for “‘the most beautiful girls in the world!’” 
(Miet) was a popular event for over a decade. From the sixties to the eighties, 
the child competitions focused on natural beauty, adding sub-competitions 
including categories titled “party wear, photogenic, and talent” (Miet). As 
competitiveness in child beauty pageants and the desire to outdo the other 
contestants grew, young girls were encouraged to wear caked-on makeup, 
fake eyelashes, expensive dresses, and hair extensions. When Toddlers & 
Tiaras debuted in 2008, this type of “glitz” pageant skyrocketed to an even 
higher popularity. In 2013, during the sixth season of Toddlers, the children’s 
pageant industry was valued at $5 billion with more than five thousand 
pageants being held in the U.S. each year (Miet).

ANALYSIS
  To further understand the connection between beauty pageants and 
the historical freak show, I analyzed two episodes of Toddlers & Tiaras. One 
episode called “Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age” follows two-year-olds Charli and 
Maddisyn-Rae and three-year-old Savannah as they compete in Charlotte, 
North Carolina; the other episode on which I focus—“Universal Royalty: 
Grand Nationals”—showcases Lola, age three, and Hailey and Dianely, both 
age seven, at a national pageant in Austin, Texas. Through these analyses, 
I hope to illuminate the similarities, as well as some differences, regarding 
normalcy, display, and consent between freak shows and child “glitz” beauty 
pageants. 

Normalcy
  In his essay Constructing Normalcy, Lennard Davis writes that “we live 
in a world of norms” (3), and we are constantly comparing ourselves to 

Seitz

152



others in order to determine if we do indeed fit into the mold of what is 
considered “normal.” Davis argues that the idea of “the norm” first entered 
American consciousness in the mid-1800s, and thus accompanied the rise of 
the freak show, which helped the general public to define what was normal. 
In the 1830s, the concept of the “Average Man” motivated people to strive 
for normalcy (Fender and Muzaffar). 
  This notion is effectively demonstrated by the normalcy bell curve. 
This bell curve (Figure 1) is a symmetrical curve that peaks in the very 
middle of its variables. The ends of the bell curve represent a trait that 
occurs very rarely. In other words, when applied to humans, the majority 
of people fall in the middle—these are who society considers “normal” 
because they have flaws but are “normal enough” to be accepted, according 
to societal norms and expectations. On one end of the bell curve, there are 
the outliers who would be considered “freaks”—those who are considered 
so abnormal that there is no way they can fit in with those who fall near 
the middle of the bell curve. The other end of the bell curve encompasses 
people who are seen as “perfect” or nearly perfect. In other words, the 
“normal” people are expected to have some flaws, but, when someone looks 
or acts in a manner that is considered close to perfection—according to 
societal norms he or she shifts towards the “ideal” end of the bell curve, 
isolating him or herself from what is considered normal. Therefore, there 
are a large number of people who would be considered “normal” while only 
a small percentage of the population falls into the categories on either end 
of the bell curve—freakish or ideal.

Seitz

Figure 1: Normalcy Bell Curve

153



   Davis asserts that, eventually, just being “normal”—that is, falling in 
the middle of the bell curve—was not good enough for some; rather, they 
focused on inching further and further towards perfection, towards the 
“ideal.” This is the notion that is evident in Toddlers & Tiaras. Each episode 
depicts “glitz” beauty pageants, which means that contestants, no matter 
the age, often wear fake hair, lots of makeup, fake nails, and extremely 
expensive outfits and dresses, just so that they can be chosen as the most 
beautiful and most perfect girl onstage. This notion of what is considered 
perfection, of course, is largely connected with femininity. Because it is 
hyper-femininity that is valued in American society, these young girls 
attempt to follow that trend.
  Both episodes of Toddlers & Tiaras that I examined showed the six 
contestants’ bedrooms, all of which were bright pink and showcased their 
crowns and sashes from past wins. This indicates to the girls that, not only 
is it “correct” to be extremely feminine, but also that pageants—and beauty 
ideals—are quite important. In fact, the most significant component of a 
pageant is the Beauty Competition. Both pageant directors described what 
this competition entailed: a beautiful face, overall great appearance, and a 
wonderful personality (“Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age”). 
  Child beauty pageants are explicit in communicating to their 
competitors what the ideal notion of beauty is. All the girls in the episodes 
wear fake hair, lots of makeup, and get manicures or wear fake nails. The 
older contestants, Hailey and Dianley, both seven, had their eyebrows 
shaved and plucked, and Dianley’s mom spray tanned her daughter. While 
she is getting her eyebrows done, Hailey says, “If something hurts me, my 
mom always says, ‘Beauty is pain’ because if you want to be beautiful, it has 
to take pain” (“Universal Royalty: Grand Nationals”). Unfortunately, this is 
not a rarity. Many young girls who participate in these pageants believe that 
they must dramatically change their appearances in order to be perfect and 
thus win the competition. 
  What is important to note, however, is that all the contestants perform 
as essentially false versions of themselves. In attempting to reach the ideal 
of beauty, they believe that they must put on fake hair and nails and do their 
makeup. But because every contestant does this—that is, no competitor is 
able to win without spending hours getting ready—this also means that the 
standard of beauty those on Toddlers are attempting to reach is unattainable 

Seitz

154



without such props. Judges expect a certain “look” that they know is not 
natural or normal; the ideal of perfection for which the girls strive is an 
illusion. 
  Their outfits are also indicative of this quest for perfection. All the 
girls’ “beauty dresses” are short, frilly, and sparkly—traits most associated 
with feminine clothing choices. In “Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age,” a facet of the 
competition includes “Stone Age Wear.” The judges are looking for “creative 
costumes, great hair and makeup, and cool routines,” explains pageant 
director Carla Smith. Two-year-old Charli dressed in a pink two-piece outfit 
as Pebbles from The Flintstones, and Savannah’s costume was that of Eve 
and was a two-piece made of leaves, while Maddisyn-Rae wore a two-piece 
dinosaur costume (“Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age”). These “girly” outfits worn by 
contestants further speak to the norm of femininity that the girls are trying 
to portray—by showing off skin in small two-piece outfits, the girls are 
attempting to fit into the feminine role that society has assigned to them.
  In the other episode analyzed, there were additional talent and 
swimwear competitions. While Lola was fully covered for her talent routine, 
Dianely and Hailey both wore two-piece outfits for their performances. The 
swimsuit competition is perhaps most indicative of the pageant’s emphasis 
on perfection. Though the judges would never take off points for a younger 
contestant’s body type, the director of the pageant, Annetta Hill, explained 
that for contestants ages six and older, “we want them to be more elegant 
and classy [than the younger girls]” (“Universal Royalty: Grand Nationals”). 
Essentially, the six-year-olds are expected to have grace similar to the 
twenty-year-old women they are competing against. 
  One of the contestants, Dianely, has a unique problem when it 
comes to her body. At the beginning of the episode, Dianley explains that 
she loves to do gymnastics, but her mother, Fransoly, says, “Her muscles 
started developing too much and she didn’t look right in a beauty dress…
so we’re taking a break from gymnastics, and her body is back to normal” 
(“Universal Royalty: Grand Nationals”). Fransoly’s use of the word “normal” 
while describing her no-longer-muscular child goes to show how pageants 
encourage a traditionally feminine look from all their competitors.
  This analysis may seem quite disconnected from the historical freak 
show: these girls are striving for perfection at the opposite end of the 
spectrum. However, it is important to note that if a person becomes too 

Seitz

155



ideal, they can still appear freakish, especially to the so-called “normal” 
people who are passing judgement. Those who fall in the middle of the 
normalcy bell curve continue to judge the outliers, whether they fall on 
the “freak” or “perfect” ends of the curve. In this case, because such young 
girls are expected to wear revealing clothing while drastically changing 
their appearance, they appear to the audience of Toddlers & Tiaras as not 
“normal.” Joshua Gamson writes that many reality shows have this effect 
on audiences. These types of shows cause spectators to see the subjects of 
the shows on television as different from the average viewer. This causes 
the viewers to compare themselves to and simultaneously want to separate 
themselves from the television subjects. 
  These notions of comparison and separation are what make Toddlers 
& Tiaras quite similar to the freak show. In the case of Toddlers, however, the 
show communicates that young girls are expected to look and move like 
twenty-year-old women, which is what makes them freakish. While freak 
shows and Toddlers are found at opposite ends at the normalcy bell curve, 
the message received by the middle “normal” viewers is the same: “Thank 
goodness I am not like them!”

Display
  It goes without saying that display is a large part of Toddlers & Tiaras 
and beauty pageants as a whole. In this case, not only are the contestants 
and parents on display for the reality show, but the girls are also being 
put on display to be evaluated by judges and other audience members 
who attend the pageants. This bears a striking resemblance to the freak 
show. Freaks were historically put on display solely to be examined and 
judged by members of the community. Further, many freaks exaggerated 
their physical differences or changed their appearances in order to make 
themselves stand out even more. For example, a group of indigenous 
Filipinos called the Igorots were brought to the United States for 
anthropological purposes. While originally put on display by the American 
government for educational reasons, the Igorots quickly became popular 
because they were touted as “dog eaters” and “‘true’ savagery, with all the 
trimmings” (Vaughan 226). The appearances and performances of the 
Igorots were altered by their handlers simply to get a crowd in the door 
rather than to educate spectators.

Seitz

156



  Child beauty pageants include immense changes in the children’s 
appearances as well as a performative aspect: in the Starz-N-Glitz: Stone 
Age pageant, contestants performed dance routines while dressed in “Stone 
Age Wear,” while at the Universal Royalty pageant, competitors performed 
talent and swimwear routines, both of which were highly performative. 
During all these routines, contestants are expected to smile; Hailey’s family 
constantly yelled “Smile!” to her while she was onstage performing. While 
performing beauty routines, all contestants made gestures that would most 
likely be described as “cutesy,” such as waving, blowing kisses, and batting 
their eyelashes. These gestures, as well as constant smiling, have become 
ways to perform stereotypically feminine behaviors for the judges and show 
off what they think the people judging them want to see.
  But these routines do not always go smoothly. Though the contestants 
are young, they are expected to have practiced in order for their routines to 
go off without a hitch. If this does not happen, it can detrimentally affect the 
scores of the contestants. Maddisyn-Rae, for example, did not do her Stone 
Age Wear routine correctly, and her dad described it as “terrible” while her 
mom said it was “a definite fail in my book” (“Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age”), 
showing the emphasis on performative display in beauty pageants.
  Just like historical freak shows, the contestants want to present the 
best versions of themselves. For those working in the freak show, that meant 
they needed to be as “abnormal” as possible. For the girls on Toddlers, this 
means they must appear as “perfect” for the judges, who only see a narrow 
part of who these girls are. While performing the beauty routine, for 
example, the emcee describes appearance (Charli, for example, has “blonde 
hair and chocolate brown eyes” (“Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age”)), hobbies, and 
fun facts, such as favorite food. One thing I noticed in the description of 
Dianely is that she was described as enjoying “cheerleading and, of course, 
makeup and pageants” (“Universal Royalty: Grand Nationals”). Her love 
of gymnastics was not mentioned, even though, at the beginning of the 
episode, she expressed that she would love to be on the Olympic gymnastics 
team. Instead, her hobbies were written—most likely by her mother—to 
reflect interests that are desirable in the pageant world, most likely because 
they are associated with feminine traits.

Seitz

157



Consent
  Contestants on Toddlers & Tiaras cannot enter the competition by 
themselves—rather, they often have a strong driving force in the form of a 
parent (usually a mother) pushing them to enter in and win pageants. There 
is no doubt that the pageant world is quite intense, but it brings up a gray 
area about whether consent by competitors is required to participate in the 
competitions. Many contestants do not really get to have a say in whether 
or not they want to compete, and there are most likely some competitors 
who believe that they must compete in pageants, lest they let down their 
mothers. 
  This gray area of consent is also prevalent in freak shows. One of the 
most well-known human anomalies, for example, was Saartjie Baartman, 
who came from Africa and was exhibited in England for her “greatly 
enlarged rump” typical of San women from the area (Lindfors 208). Known 
as the Hottentot Venus, Baartman “testified in [sic] behalf of her managers, 
saying that she had freely consented to exhibit her person in England, was 
earning good money, and wanted the show to go on. There was some doubt 
that she fully understood the nature of the contract she had entered into” 
(Lindfors 210). Because Baartman was brought to England from Africa 
and did not speak English as her first language, many believe that she was 
manipulated and told that she was signing a contract with different terms 
than those that were actually included in the document. 
  These consent issues are evident in my analysis of Toddlers. Before 
competitor Charli was born, for example, her mother, Samantha, would 
enter their pet dog into dog beauty pageants. She says that “Charli was just 
next in line. She didn’t have a choice” (“Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age”). Never 
during the episode, though, does she actually ask her daughter if she likes 
or wants to participate in pageants. Three-year-old Savannah is another 
story. She does not hold back when talking about her dislike of pageants, 
saying that she would much rather play hockey with her dad than spend a 
weekend competing. When her mom, Natasha, says, “I thought you wanted 
to go to the pageant,” Savannah replies, “No”; when the producer asks if she 
is excited to go to the pageant, Savannah shakes her head. When she is asked 
if she would rather go play hockey, Savannah nods. Though Savannah’s 
mother constantly says things like “[a]s long as she wants to do it, I’ll do 
whatever it takes,” or “[s]he loves being onstage!,” she does not actually listen 

Seitz

158



to her daughter, who does not want to be a pageant princess (“Starz-N-Glitz: 
Stone Age”).
  Another issue that relates to consent is money. The pageant entry 
fees are not cheap, nor are the dresses, hair, and makeup. This means that 
the parents who pay for the competitions put immense pressure on their 
daughters to perform well, especially considering that there is usually 
money involved for the winners of the top prizes. Savannah’s mother even 
takes on extra jobs working as a clown in order to pay for pageants and 
constantly reminds her daughter of this fact, saying, “I didn’t dress up like 
a clown for a runner-up title” (“Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age”). Dianely’s mom 
confesses, “I’m very competitive. If you’re in it, you have to do anything to 
win” (“Universal Royalty: Grand Nationals”). If anything, it seems as though 
the parents have more at stake than their children.
  The parents of competitors act much like the freakshow handlers. 
They completely control their children’s routines and outfits and dictate 
that the girls should love pageants—recall that Dianely’s mother forced her 
to quit gymnastics because it was making her body type “not right” for a 
beauty dress. Further, each parent is heavily invested in the competitions—
often more so than their daughters—just as freakshow handlers often paid 
large amounts of money to get the freaks and put them on display in the 
first place. In Baartman’s case, she was made to perform even when she was 
clearly sick. One observer noted, “She [Baartman] was extremely ill, and the 
man insisted on her dancing...the poor creature pointed to her throat and 
to her knees as if she felt pain in both, pleading with tears that he would 
not force her compliance” (qtd. in Lindfors 209). If she did not perform, 
the freakshow handler would lose money, which is why he would force 
performers to exhibit themselves, regardless of whether or not they wanted 
it. In their eyes, it was up to the human anomalies to make back the money 
the handlers had paid for them, or, in the case of Toddlers, to win. 
  One difference between freakshow handlers and the mothers on 
Toddlers, however, is the way that they fit into the freak show. Handlers 
presented themselves publicly as “normal” people, just like the spectators 
coming to see the show. On the other hand, the portrayal of the mothers 
and their relationships with their daughters on Toddlers & Tiaras indicates 
a demonization and, in a sense, freakification of the mothers as well. The 
stereotypical pageant mom spends large amounts of time and money to 

Seitz

159



drastically change her daughter’s look and put her on stage to be judged 
nearly solely on appearance, and the moms are portrayed as egotistical and 
over-the-top. In fact, moms are often depicted in the show as a hindrance 
“to their daughters’ chance of success” (Demanjee 467).
  The biggest tie between these pageants and the freak show, however, 
is the issue of consent itself. Because parents have the option to make 
choices for their children, Toddlers often emphasizes a case like Savannah’s, 
in which the child does not want to perform, but her mother forces her to. 
While some performers such as Baartman believed that they were freely 
consenting, many freaks in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries felt as 
though they had no other choice but to perform in the freak show. This was 
especially the case for performers who had physical disabilities. Brigham 
Fordham explains the traditional freakshow justification for display: “It is 
assumed that persons with exceptional bodies are destined for disgrace and 
unemployment due to their unusual physical characteristics. The freak show 
‘discovers’ and saves these people by giving them what is assumed to be the 
only possible kind of productive employment and identity” (12). Especially 
in the Victorian era, there were fewer opportunities for those who were 
physically handicapped, and performing in a freak show seemed to be the 
only option, which is similar to the young girls on Toddlers who are trapped 
into participating in pageants because they do not think they have any other 
choice.
  The fact that Toddlers & Tiaras is a reality show, though, adds another 
aspect to the consent issue in the form of exploitation. Christopher Cianci 
reports that children who star in reality shows often receive very little legal 
protection with regards to how much they can work and what they can be 
made to do. Not only does the Toddlers crew follow contestants around at 
the pageant, but they also come into the children’s homes, spending a great 
deal of time interviewing the family. Because of the lack of laws in place 
protecting children on reality shows, the producers can effectively exploit 
the drama and tantrums of these children while not technically receiving 
their consent.

IMPLICATIONS
  The real question to ask after analyzing Toddlers and Tiaras and 
comparing and contrasting the television program and the freak show is: 

Seitz

160



why does it all matter? Clearly, the reality show’s ties to the historical freak 
show have many implications, the two most important of which are self-
image and sexualization. 
  One could argue that Toddlers & Tiaras is the result of the world in 
which we live—that is, the result of a world that is not only grossly mediated, 
but also one in which media has a large impact on what society sees as 
acceptable. Jessica Bennett notes the impact that shows such as Toddlers 
can have on its predominantly female audience: “Reared on reality TV and 
celebrity makeovers, girls as young as Marleigh [age 2] are using beauty 
products earlier, spending more and still feeling worse about themselves.” 
She goes on to explain that today’s culture has come to make “the girls of 
Toddlers & Tiaras look ordinary” (Bennett). 
  Not only are girls trained to focus on their appearance because of 
these shows, but they are also expected to do so at an increasingly younger 
age. Instead of taking the time to do what was formerly considered a 
“normal” activity for a pre-teen—such as playing soccer or going to the 
mall—the new “normal” is spending countless hours scrutinizing the way 
they look and the ways that they can change it, including changing hair 
style and color, getting nails done, and, for some, even surgery. Because 
girls as young as those depicted on Toddlers & Tiaras are making these major 
appearance changes, older girls who may watch the show feel as though they 
must also adhere to that standard of beauty.
  This effect on the self-worth of young girls is not limited just to the 
audience of pageants but is often even more manifested in the contestants 
themselves. Because pageants are so involved and contestants often 
compete for many years, the ideals of beauty can become skewed, starting 
when pageant princesses are young girls. The so-called “rituals” of female 
beauty that contestants must undergo “speak to an ideal, heteronormative 
and consumption-based femininity” (Demanjee 465). In other words, 
the perception of beauty that is held by contestants on Toddlers is most 
likely an idea of femininity that is unattainable. Yet, because of the time 
spent performing in pageants and attempting to attain this ideal beauty, 
competitors feel as though there is something wrong when they are not able 
to do so, which harms their self-esteem. 
  The second major implication that stems from the popularity of 
a show like Toddlers & Tiaras relates to how society at large perceives 

Seitz

161



young girls. In my analysis of the show, girls were judged heavily on their 
appearances, and, in competitions other than Beauty, they often wore two-
piece outfits, and their hair and makeup matched that of a twenty-year-
old woman much more than an eight-year-old girl. Further, in their quest 
for beauty, the girls had their eyebrows shaved and were spray tanned to 
compete with young adults. 
  In fact, in both episodes I have analyzed, the title of Ultimate Grand 
Supreme—the top title that a contestant can win and one that any age can 
receive—went to girls who were eighteen- and twenty-years-old. This, 
of course, is not surprising, as the women who won undoubtedly had 
more experience than the toddlers they were competing against. What 
is surprising, however, is the fact that the young contestants featured on 
Toddlers would be expected to compete with contestants who were ten years 
older. 
  This points to the unnecessary sexualization of the girls on the show 
and in pageants. A major reason that contestants put on the hair and heavy 
makeup is not only to attempt to attain an ideal of beauty but to attain a 
beauty that is expected of young women, not young girls. Additionally, as 
Demajnee points out, sexuality has become “strategic for contestants, who 
quickly learn that they are judged positively on their ability to mimic the 
sexualised [sic], girlish poses in their routines, such as wiggling their hips, 
flicking up their legs as they strut off stage, blowing kisses and pouting” 
(465). Because of the young age of the girls on the show, this “sexy” behavior 
coupled with revealing outfits create an unfamiliar dichotomy between 
childish innocence and intense sexuality. However, as Demanjee goes on 
to explain, “Performances [are] dismissed as harmless, fun, part of the 
normalised [sic] play and mimicry of children, as opposed to alternative 
readings such as the exploitation and sexualisation [sic] of children” (465).

CONCLUSION
  Through my analysis, it is clear that Toddlers & Tiaras bears a strange 
and troubling resemblance to the historical freak show. It is evident that 
the program shares similarities to the historical freak show in terms of 
normalcy, display, and consent. Though the girls displayed on Toddlers are 
seen as freakish because of their quest to become the “ideal woman,” the fact 
that society ogles, ostracizes, and sexualizes them still presents troubling 

Seitz

162



implications. 
  Many would like to think that our society has progressed past 
the historical freak shows, and the reasons that they existed in the first 
place. The sad reality, however, is that the freak show has merely been 
reconfigured to take the form of reality shows such as Toddlers & Tiaras. 
While society will always look for a group outside the norm—be they on 
the grotesque or ideal end of the spectrum—the effects of reality shows 
are often harmful and long-lasting, whether for the subject of the show 
or the audience and larger society who pass judgement. Reality shows are 
not going away anytime soon, but it is important to remember that the 
programs only portray a small sliver of the real lives of contestants. They, 
too, just want to be accepted.
 

Seitz

163



WORKS CITED

Bennett, Jessica. “Are We Turning Tweens Into Generation Diva?” Newsweek. 
Newsweek, LLC., 29 Mar. 2009. Web. 06 Feb. 2016.

Cianci, Christopher C. “Entertainment or Exploitation?: Reality Television 
and the Inadequate Protection of Child Participants Under the Law.” 
University of Southern California Gould School of Law. 18 Feb. 2010. Web. 
03 Feb. 2016.

Davis, Lennard J. “Constructing Normalcy: The Bell Curve, the Novel, 
and the Invention of the Disabled Body in the Nineteenth Century.” 
The Disability Studies Reader. 2nd ed. Ed. Lennard J. Davis. New York: 
Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2006. 3-16. Web. 02 Feb. 2016.

Demanjee, Tisha. “Nursing at the Screen: Post Feminist Daughters and 
Demonized Mothers on Toddlers and Tiaras.” Feminist Media Studies 15.3 
(2015): 460-473. Web. 07 Dec. 2015.

Fender, Lynn and Irfan Muzaffar. “The History of the Bell Curve: Sorting 
and the Idea of Normal.” Educational Theory 58.1 (2008): 63-82. Web. 03 
Feb. 2016.

Fordham, Brigham A. “Dangerous Bodies: Freak Shows, Expression, and 
Exploitation.” UCLA Entertainment Law Review 14.207 (2007). Web. 16 
Mar. 2016.

Friedman, Hilary Levey. “The Evolution of American-Style Child Beauty 
Pageants.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc., 10 May 
2011. Web. 01 Feb. 2016.

Gamson, Joshua. “Why I Love Trash.” Freaks Talk Back: Tabloid Talk Shows and 
Sexual Nonconformity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998. 
2-24. Web. 06 Feb 2016.

Seitz

164



Lindfors, Bernth. “Ethnological Show Business: Footlighting the Dark 
Continent.” Freakery: Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. Ed. 
Rosemarie Garland Thomson. New York: New York University, 1996. 
207-218. Print. 

Miet, Hannah. “How Child Beauty Pageants Got Weird.” Voactiv. Voatciv.com, 
06 Nov. 2013. Web. 31 Jan. 2016.

“People and Events: Origins of the Beauty Pageant.” WIPB. PBS. 2001. Web. 
31 Jan. 2016.

“Starz-N-Glitz: Stone Age.” Toddlers and Tiaras. TLC, Silver Spring, 
Maryland. 3 July 2013. Television.

Tamer, Christine. “Toddlers, Tiaras, and Pedophilia? The ‘Borderline Child 
Pornography’ Embraced by the American Public.” Texas Review of 
Entertainment & Sports Law 13.1 (2011): 85-101. Web. 07 Feb. 2016.

“The Five Biggest Controversies to Hit ‘Toddlers and Tiaras.’” Business 
Insider. Business Insider, Inc., 17 Sept. 2012. Web. 01 Feb. 2016. 

Thomson, Rosemarie Garland. “The Cultural Work of American Freak 
Shows, 1835-1940.” Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in 
American Culture and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press, 
1997. 55-80. Web. 16 Mar. 2016.

“Universal Royalty: Grand Nationals.” Toddlers and Tiaras. TLC, Silver Spring, 
Maryland. 13 July 2011. Television.

Vaughan, Christopher A. “Ogling Igorots: The Politics and Commerce of 
Exhibiting Cultural Otherness, 1898-1913.” Freakery: Cultural Spectacles 
of the Extraordinary Body. Ed. Rosemarie Garland Thomson. New York: 
New York University, 1996. 219-233. Print. 

Seitz

165


