Re-Examining the Books of My Teen Years: The Christian Charm Course by Emily Hunter
Rating: 0 stars of 5
One of my personal projects this year is going back through some of the books I read during my high school and college years and re-evaluating them. It has been an interesting process thus far, as I have been able to trace a lot of the harmful things I was taught during those formative years back to such books and the people who recommended them to me. It is my hope that those of us who are doing this internal work now can collectively replace the lies and harmful messages these books told us with truth and find healing as we take a closer look at them together.
When I was in either junior high school or high school, a woman at the church I attended at the time led our Sunday school class of teen girls through this curriculum: The Christian Charm Course by Emily Hunter, published by Harvest House Publishers. I am reviewing the non-updated edition here (there is an updated one published in 2009; I will comment on that one at the end), as that is the one I personally read sometime in the early 2000’s. I do have a copy of the updated edition and the teacher’s edition for comparison.
Book Positioning
As of March 24, 2023, the publisher of this book still has the updated edition listed for sale in the Harvest Kids section of their website under the subsection ‘Tweens.’ For reference, tweens are typically defined as 8-12 year olds, which usually means kids in grades three through six or seven.
The publisher says over 185,000 copies of the book have sold (I have heard publishers say that the average book sells less than 5,000 copies, for perspective).
An Ethically Questionable Beginning
The first eight or nine pages of the book are especially problematic, so let’s take a walk through those and then I will comment on some of the other issues scattered throughout the book.
The very beginning of the book has a section titled, “A Word from Emily Hunter.” The book is formatted like a workbook and this section serves as a preface. It begins:
“Dear Pupil,
This is your personal notebook on Christian Charm. It will contain your personal measurements, your “before” and “after” pictures, fashion notes to flatter your particular figure...”
The idea that any book written for teen girls or children (remember, the publisher is marketing this book as being for children as young as eight years old) teaches them to start tracking their body measurements, seeing themselves through before and after pictures, or dressing to flatter their figures is alarming. It perpetuates unhealthy body image, teaches young girls to look for flaws in and objectify their own bodies, and to see their bodies as things that need changing.
The First Lesson Page
The first page of actual content in the book is a lesson called Posing Pointers, and it has a list of instructions the reader should walk herself through when posing for photographs – things like minding your posture, making sure you smile, keeping your feet angled a particular way, keeping your hands behind your back and not letting them hang by your sides, crossing your feet at the ankles when sitting, etc. These things aren’t necessarily bad, but it is concerning that the first page in this teen / tween girls’ Sunday school curriculum book polices the way young girls present their bodies when being photographed. The modern equivalent of this would be starting a girls’ Bible study book with a lesson on how to pose for Instagram photos – on the first page of the book.
The Second Lesson Page
The second page is a lesson titled, A ‘New Look’ Within and Without: A ‘New Look’ in My Outward Appearance.
Such a title implies that tween and teen girls need a new look instead of being able to just be themselves - kids - and learn more about how God created them and loves them as they are.
Under that, there are two large squares where the student is instructed to place their before and after photos – the before photo taken before they start this course and the after photo taken at the end of it.
The second page of this book teaches young girls to start seeing themselves through before and after photos and instructs them to take such photos.
Below this, there is a paragraph that is supposed to describe a young person’s thought process before she knows God - a “spiritual before,” which I didn’t find particularly realistic, and then to the right of that there is a paragraph that is supposedly representative of how a young girl should think after she has come to know God. This paragraph includes wording that implies that the way she thought about the world before knowing God was nothing more than her “own selfish outlook.” It concludes with the statement, “At last I’m a real person!” Such language is so dehumanizing, both to the girl herself and to others who may disagree with her religious beliefs. It teaches her to see people who don’t share her faith as not being real people.
So these first two pages have nothing to do with teaching courtesy toward others (which is implied subject material in a book that claims to be a Christian manners / charm course) and instead focuses on how the girls should feel about the way they look and how others see them. It teaches them to see flaws that apparently need ‘fixing’ in themselves, and teaches them to dehumanize other people who are not the kind of Christian they are or who are not Christians at all.
The Third and Fourth Lesson Pages
The third page is a lesson titled, Taking a Look at Myself Spiritually. It is meant to serve as a spiritual checkup. If the reader is not “a born again child of God,” as the author puts it, there is a step-by-step list that walks them through how to become a Christian according to the author’s perspective. This follows the typical path many conservative churches teach - sometimes called the Romans Road - then presents what the author calls a prayer of commitment, which is basically her rendition of the sinner’s prayer. If you aren’t familiar with what that means, in some Christian circles, the perception of coming to know God often involves praying some sort of prayer that acknowledges your status as a sinner, that you recognize your need for Jesus, and affirms your acceptance of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection as having paid the price for your sin so you can receive eternal life and forgiveness for your sin through Him.
Part of the issue with what is happening on this page is that there is no real gospel presentation. There is no story about Jesus or who He was. There is no foundation that leads to an understanding of what the reader is praying. It comes across more like this: “Here, quick. Pray this prayer that you may not ever understand and you’ll immediately start looking glowier!” In fact, the last paragraph on this page, right under the sinner’s prayer tells the reader that once she has prayed this, her heart will find peace with God and all her tension lines will relax and she will have a new radiance and glow that shines from within! The author says the reader’s “new look” within leads to her “new look” without and concludes, “To be truly attractive, a girl must have both!”
The author asserts, therefore, that to be truly attractive, a girl must be a Christian and her version of Christianity should give her glowing skin and relax all her “harsh tension lines.”
This version of Christianity normalizes putting on your happy face so you can “look” like a Christian because you can’t be truly attractive without it. The language she chooses implies that she wants these young girls to be attractive, which begs the question: to whom, exactly, are we trying to make our young daughters attractive?
I noticed something interesting whilst sharing my observations about these first three pages with my husband. After I commented on that last paragraph, he brought up an idea that we had heard countless times before in conservative circles – it basically boiled down to the thought that Christians should have outwardly visible joy that comes from the inside, regardless of circumstances.
I take issue with this kind of teaching because being a Christian does not suddenly make your life a joyous one. It does not get rid of your problems or emotions, make hard times less difficult, or make pain less painful. It does not make neurodivergent people neurotypical. It does not erase grief or hardship. Joy is not synonymous with happiness and glowing skin and not having lines on your face. (Some lines are caused by smiling and laughing!) I remember hearing people at church tell me that I should always have joy in my heart when I was younger and thinking, “I don’t know what joy feels like.” I knew what happiness felt like. I knew wonder, awe, contentedness, safety… but I could not have defined joy for you without telling you that I thought it meant some kind of happiness that makes you smile even when you are sad. That is what these folks made it sound like.
Let’s just put aside for the moment the fact that this then stigmatizes showing authentic emotions and being vulnerable in community, and instead teaches young girls to mask emotions in order to look happy all the time so they can present as glowy, joyous Christians.
Now, I do not claim to know what joy feels like for anyone else, but I can tell you this: the first time I felt what I defined as joy and truly believe was joy for me was after my Dad passed away. Before you try to equate joy with happiness here, you should know that my Dad was the best man I have ever known. He was gentle and kind and generous. I never heard him raise his voice or speak poorly of someone else. He was wise and knowledgeable and gave of himself constantly to serve others in countless invisible ways. Losing his presence here on earth was traumatic and soul-crushing and I will never be over it. So I am not saying that I experienced joy because of his death. But there was a day in my season of crushing grief when I was crying and worshiping in the shower and I sensed the presence of God with me. In that moment, deep inside myself, from where my spirit was sitting in dust and ashes, I felt hope – hope that there is more after this; that God is faithful and is who He says He is; that glory is coming, and that I can trust Him; He will redeem what has been lost and broken. It did not feel like happiness. It felt like hope and surrender and brokenness and redemption and peace and trust and faith and contentedness and being held in the midst of utter brokenness and reliance. And it did not look like smiling faces and glowing skin. It looked like tears running down a shower drain and a puffy, red face as I lifted my hands to Jesus and let Him hold my broken heart.
This version of Christianity that teaches girls that because they know Jesus, they should look glowy and not have any signs of tension on their faces is inauthentic, toxic, and disembodied and frankly, I cannot stand it. It teaches girls to put on a happy face and mind how they look to other people instead of teaching them that they can show up as fully themselves before God and other believers and expect to be seen and loved and safe as they are. It teaches them that they have to change themselves and fit inside a mold to be accepted by God and others around them. It teaches them that they exist to look attractive for other people, which is really disturbing, especially when we are talking about young girls here.
The author reinforces this idea that we need to look nice for other people on the next page, when she suggests that the reader should want a new look in their outward appearance and summarizes the reader’s presumed wish this way: “I want to be attractive and charming, so that I will please others,” and “I want to be lovely and beautiful within, so that I will please God.”
I don’t know how other readers took this but as a young girl in teen girls’ Sunday school, I read this as, “I need to change on the outside so I can be attractive to and please others, and I need to change who I am on the inside in order to please God.” Never mind that God delights in us and loves us as we are just as a good parent loves their child unconditionally and delights in all of the little things that make them unique. I didn’t learn that in these types of circles. I learned that I needed to look, behave, and be a certain way in order for God to be pleased with me as His child and to be accepted or assigned worth in my own social circle. (Note: While I did inherit healthier narratives from my parents, curricula like this one used at church and the people who upheld such teachings still harmed me.)
The next section asks the reader to sign an agreement stating that they will practice the things taught in this course, then asks them to list the things they want to improve about their physical appearance and their heart toward God, others, and self. It conditions young girls to want to change their bodies instead of feel at home in them.
The Fifth Lesson Page
The next page offers a section for notes and review, followed by a section that includes questions about the lessons thus far. The first question asks, “What are two basic reasons why a Christian girl should strive to look lovely.” I wrote down only one - the one with which I had been conditioned to respond in this class: “So people will see God in me.” This breaks my heart now as an adult because it tells me that I was taught that people could not recognize me as being made in the image of God unless I fit into their requirements on the outside.
The next question asks, “Does a girl’s attractiveness depend solely upon the characteristics she is born with?” and the implied answer based on the lessons we heard in our Sunday school lesson that accompanied this section of the book was “no.” This also hurts my heart, as it taught me that I had to add other things to myself and make myself look a certain way on the outside in order to be likeable, to fit in, or to be approved of.
The next question conditions the reader to want to appear pleasing to the eyes of man and tries to spiritualize that implication with the idea that we are visible to God and should strive to be appealing for God too.
The author’s ideas reinforce insecure and shame-based attachment styles often throughout the book.
The Sixth Lesson Page
Next we come to a lesson on diet and the author asks tween girls - who are not shopping for their own groceries or planning and cooking their own meals, mind you - if the foods they have chosen to eat in the past day were “the proper foods for smooth skin, sparkling eyes, shining hair, gleaming teeth, smooth nails, healthy nerves, vitality and pep.” I am all for healthy eating, but the woman lists no scientific information about foods that have been found to accomplish these things for the reader, and instead lists a set of “basic daily requirements,” including a quart of milk per day and 3 pats of butter per day. The reader is supposed to add up their diet points based on whether they met these requirements and hope they reach a “perfect score for beauty and health.” We are then taught to tiptoe around the room with our arms stretched toward the ceiling and to sit cross-legged, rocking back and forth on our hips in the name of exercise and fitness.
While this may seem humorously dated and mild, it gets worse.
The Seventh Lesson Page
The seventh page has a body measurements chart that instructs the young reader, who is perhaps as young as 8 years old and in 3rd grade, to measure her bust, upper arm, waist, hips, thighs and calves. Underneath these instructions is a note that says, “Bust and hips should be equal, with waist ten inches smaller. A variation of two inches is allowable.”
I find that note particularly infuriating. Not only does it completely ignore the fact that girls and women come in all kinds of shapes and sizes and some of us have larger hips than busts or busts than hips or bellies than hips, and we are all beautiful as we are; it also teaches young girls that if they don’t measure up with a perfect hourglass figure, their bodies are not “allowable.” This is so damaging, not just for people with different body shapes and sizes, but also for people who do have her so called “perfect figure.” Speaking from personal experience, when I first read this, I was clinically underweight and my bust-waist-hip ratio was within her requirements. Rather than having a healthy goal of gaining a little bit of weight so that I could fall within healthy guidelines, I took to heart this author’s message that my body was only acceptable as it was and that if I gained any inches outside of her severe recommended range, it would not be lovely or beautiful or okay. I internalized this message at a young age and carried it with me such that even now, as a woman who is not overweight, has finally attained what is considered a healthy weight for my age and height, and has a pear-shaped figure now, I can still hear her in my head telling me that I need to reduce some inches off my hips and waist so I can measure up to that idealized shape she describes. It’s such a harmful teaching that leads to body dysmorphia and girls believing lies about their worth.
The Eighth and Ninth Lesson Pages
The next page has the reader write down all of their “before” measurements, with space provided underneath for them to record their measurements again at the end of the course, which implies that the instructor wants the numbers to change between now and then. So to put it bluntly, the author wants these young girls – tweens and teens – to start keeping track of their body measurements and striving to achieve what she describes as an allowable ratio between their body parts. This page has an illustration of a section of a tape measure on it that does not go past 29 inches, and the following page is a calorie chart that lists the number of calories in dozens of common foods so the reader can start tracking their calorie intake. So we now have young girls dieting, counting calories, and trying to mold their bodies into the row-house shapes that this woman has decided are the acceptable ones. And remember, her motive is for us to be pleasing and acceptable to other people.
There is no discussion about loving people of all shapes and sizes; of accepting others for who they are rather than what they look like on the outside; of treating people with respect and dignity; no note about feeling comfortable in our own skin or being grateful for the bodies we have. Only discussion about how the reader “should” look on the outside and how those who don’t measure up to her own list of requirements are apparently not allowable.
The review questions for this second section of lessons imply that girls who spend time with Jesus will have “magnetic personalities," which also does not leave much room for variation, does it?
I just want to re-emphasize as I go through this that I did not learn these things from my parents at home. They did not teach me this kind of damaging narrative. I learned this in Sunday school from a staff member’s wife. Later, when I was attending a Christian college, the ideas outlined here were reiterated by some female faculty who also taught ideology like this. I’m not going through this study to try to accuse or condemn any of these people, but rather to shed light on what is harmful in these kinds of teachings, to bring awareness to the fact that these kinds of damaging ideas are not okay, and to hopefully see awareness lead to change in the way we talk to our children, teen girls, and women in church settings, in the kinds of books publishers are deciding to put out into the world, and in the types of curricula that church leaders are approving for use in their ministries and selling in their church bookstores.
Other Troublesome Content
A quote that brings up some questions for me is this one, from page 20 (which is the thirteenth lesson):
“I must remember that a lovely posture and a graceful carriage are essential to charm. But I will never appear charming to others if I do not also cultivate a beautiful spiritual posture and a pleasing Christian walk in my day-to-day life.”
At first glance, you might think, “Well, good posture and a daily walk with God are important for a Christian girl. I can get behind that statement,” but look at the more insidious undertone here. The author implies that the reason for doing so is to appear charming to others. So the motive for a “Christian walk” then becomes all about appearing charming – putting on a show for others. I’d like to posit that this kind of thinking leads to inauthentic Christianity that looks nothing like Christ. It also implies that girls who are not Christians have no appeal in the eyes of others, which is just not true.
A poem on page 23 says that lips that defy, and girls who are unchaste are neither clean nor appealing. Rather, it claims, the “fairest of them all” has bright moods and “happy rainbows of delight.”
Lips that speak truth and justice in defiance of cultural (and religious) norms that are contrary to the values taught and lived out by Jesus, and ladies who bravely show up as their full selves willing to be vulnerable enough to show their true emotions and struggles (with discernment and when appropriate, of course) are far more appealing than than inauthentic happy faces on people who go right along with an evil status quo and pretend that everything is perfect.
The section on hair care is dated and limited in scope, especially in relation to how hair textures differ between ethnicities. It also implies that changing your hair color is synonymous with not being sure of your personal worth and wearing a disingenuous mask. The teacher’s manual elaborates on this in especially appalling ways. It’s sadly ironic, and the teacher’s narrative implies that a girl who colors her hair should / would be viewed with pity and contempt. The text also emphasizes long hair as being “truly feminine,” and suggests that the reader make sure they look like a girl, not a boy. It also instructs the reader, “Don’t usurp the role of the male,” with a reminder that she is a weaker vessel, and emphasizes the value of her chastity and wearing long hair as a symbol of her “modesty and virtue.”
Later, there is a page with a “How Feminine Am I?” chart that asks the readers to check off the qualities that increase her femininity vs. those that “destroy” it.
The qualities the author asserts as those that “destroy femininity” include:
· A bulky, flabby figure
· Sluggishness
· Mannish attire
· Older, daring styles
· Revealing clothes
· Gawdy makeup
· Mannish, short hairdos
· A dead-pan face
· Stained fingers
· Drinking liquor
· Reading smutty books
· An ungainly walk
· Sprawling in chairs
· A slouching posture
· A loud mouth
· Raspy, gravelly voice
· Domineering attitudes
· False sophistication
· Becoming “cheap”
· Pessimism
· Unchastity
Among others. So basically, according to this woman, if we have a neurodivergent gait, do not not have a perfect hourglass figure that is trim and tight, have a chronic illness that makes it more difficult for us to move around and be active, like to dress in clothes other than dresses and skirts (the illustration of the girl who has “destroyed her femininity” in the book depicts her wearing jeans and sneakers with a jacket and tee shirt), like to wear our hair short, aren’t constantly smiling, have a health condition that impacts our vocal tone, etc., she posits that we have destroyed our femininity.
Her list of traits that increase femininity include, among other things:
· A trim, disciplined body
· Dainty, pretty clothing
· Youthful, girlish styles
· Quiet, conservative dress
· “Natural” makeup
· Soft, clean hair
· A ready smile
· A delicate fragrance
· Clean, lovely hands
· Purity of thought life
· A queen-like posture
· Sitting prettily
· A lovely, graceful walk
· Soft, gentle speech
· Pleasant vocal tones
· A refined vocabulary
· A reverent attitude
· Ladylike reserve
· Forgiving and forgetting
· Optimism
· Sexual purity
While none of these characteristics is inherently negative, the idea that we can only be feminine if we fit this particular mold is damaging. Additionally, the infantilizing language of some of these is disturbing. “Youthful and girlish styles?” If the reader is a teenager, why do we want her to dress like a young girl? That sounds an awful lot like the language used by some twisted men throughout history that wanted their wives to be delicate playthings who were uneducated, followed orders, and never stood up for themselves. Historical texts like Mary Wallstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Woman come to mind when I read things like this. Mary discussed the way men of her century liked their wives to basically be children themselves in that book in very poignant and relevant ways.Another poem implies that putting on bows and feminine things can’t make a girl who is “unclean” or not feminine on the inside into a “feminine rose,” insinuating that doing so would be more like pinning petals onto something and that regardless of any factor, femininity is something that can be lost.
The author polices the reader’s hands, stating that she should “sand with pumice to remove callouses and rough spots,” and that all nails should be polished and kept a very specific shape and length. Short nails are described as stubs and long nails as claws. Graceful hand postures are mandated and stimming forbidden.
At this point in my reading, I was thinking about all the internalized anxiety that ends up eating away at you from the inside out when everything about your outward behavior and appearance is completely controlled, especially for neurodivergent persons.The reader is then taught to dress to flatter her figure, because all 8-12 year old girls need to flatter their figures, right? Because teenagers should be making sure they are dressing in the most attractive ways possible, shouldn’t they? The author seems to assume so. She lists a wide variety of do’s and don’ts for the readers based on her perceptions of how clothes look on people of different heights, body shapes, etc. All involving dresses and skirts, of course, and diagrams are included to illustrate what she means. The funny thing is that many of the things she forbids look lovely on almost everyone and are even considered fashionable and flattering today.
There is a page that asks the reader to size up her figure and share what her dominant “figure fault” is, as well as what techniques she can use to minimize it.
In a section with further tips for dressing, Emily says the reader “must look up-to-date” (but not “first in fashion”), and states that sewing saves money. As a sewist, I can tell you with firm conviction that sewing does not usually save money. Also, wear whatever you want, regardless of whether or not it is trendy and up-to-date. She also polices how many bright colors the reader can wear at a time (one) and how much of her outfit can be bright or vivid, which is an idea that seems quite racist to me, considering how vibrant, multicolored, and bold ethnic fabrics often are. Personal style is also policed, as is how one should dress at church - a standard only achievable by people with means.
Emily declares that a girl’s clothing choices make her “an accomplice in the sin” if a male is aroused by what she wears. There are so many issues with this kind of thinking that I won’t go into here, but this kind of narrative is deeply concerning in a curriculum meant for young girls.
In Conclusion
I was the kid who read massive etiquette books for fun – pure enjoyment – when I was young. I generally like etiquette, manners, and treating others with courtesy. It is not the information provided on etiquette that I take issue with in this book. In fact, I think it was severely lacking in that respect, often teaching the reader to dehumanize others and focus on themselves instead under the guise of a false spirituality.
The objectifying narrative that places the reader’s worth in what she looks like on the outside and how others perceive her is so harmful, and I can trace a lot of my own inaccurate perceptions of myself throughout my teenage and college years back to this book and the culture in which it was taught. I would never recommend it to anyone else and it baffles my mind that we were still using it in the 2000’s.
The updated version is marginally better in that they removed the calorie counting chart, the page about taking your measurements, and a few other dated notions. They also updated the illustrations to include some people of color. However, I found that it contained even more triggering language for people with disordered eating and the same insidious undertones were still present.
Did you go through this curriculum during your teen years, too? Or did you receive similar messaging from another source? I would love to hear from you. Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments section at the end of this article, along with any observations about how such messaging affected you that you care to share.