Thursday, February 28, 2008

wooo feminism

As a follow up to our rousing discussion on feminism, I shall start this post :D

Kelsie was saying after class that women (subconsciously?) are more sexual in order to gain advantages in a male dominated environment (we used the examples of debate and corporate settings). Women, feeling somehow disadvantaged to men, want to use their sexuality in order to gain favors. Men don't really have that option. Kelsie felt that it shouldn't be that way because it's unfair to men and some women who don't do that. This group of people essentially have to work twice as hard as women "flaunting it" (thanks Fatima) in order for them to be considered.
I agree with this notion. While it is resourceful, a quality that shouldn't be inherently bad, wearing provocative clothing isn't as great a quality as, say, hard work, integrity, etc... If women want to prove themselves as humans rather than objects, they really should start acting that way.
I don't believe in feminism in its connotative sense, but rather, as Laz is, I believe in equality. Men and women should be considered on a level playing field. I think it'd be unfair if Hilary Clinton was elected and people said, "Oh, it's because she's a woman." Why couldn't we say she won because she has better ideas? Shouldn't we compare what our candidates are saying and proposing rather than looking at who they are on a superficial level? You know, like how we're supposed to?
And Kelsie brought up the interesting point of how racism is greatly frowned upon while sexism... not so much. I can't really give an answer as to why that occurs but I think it all really boils down to the individual. Personally, I don't feel too offended when someone makes fun of my race. I'll laugh at the Asian jokes because that's what they are, jokes. Someone else, however, might get grossly offended. We just hear about the people who get offended because they feel that they need to do something about it. The other half, people who aren't really offended, just don't really care enough to say anything. Same thing goes with feminist jokes. People can either laugh at it or get offended by it. It really depends on what kind of sense of humor the person has. In my opinion, people who get offended by those kinds of jokes need to lighten up a bit. Sure, it might be embarrassing for a little bit, but it's just a joke. It's relatively minor compared to, say, being excluded from something (promotion, raise, an organization) because of your race, gender, creed etc.

Concerning make up, vanity and such...
Men aren't necessarily at fault. Sure we are the ones benefiting from it, but that doesn't necessarily mean we're the cause of it. It's more of a societal thing vs gender. Society makes us think we're ugly and that we need to make ourselves look prettier in order to please other people. Also, don't think that men don't feel the same pressures. We do. How do you think an out of shape ugly looking guy feels when he sees a movie where a strong muscular guy always gets the girl? There are two possibilities. One, he's really insecure about his body image and hates himself for being fat and ugly. Two, he accepts himself as who he is and doesn't really care. It really all comes down to whether you accept who you see in the mirror or not. Societal pressures may force you to think one way or the other but it all boils down to that individual decision of acceptance.

My overriding philosophy about this is that it's up to the individual to make something out of himself (I'm using the masculine pronoun just for simplicity). He can't expect free handouts if he wants to make something of himself in life. He has to work hard for it. That kind of determination is what should be judged, not race, gender, attractiveness or any other superficial quality. It sounds corny, but it's really what's inside that counts.

I hope I didn't say anything too controversial... I think I didn't. We'll see.

7 comments:

Kelsie said...

First, an anecdote:

This afternoon, I recounted to one of my guy friends our heated class discussion on sexism. I then told him that we were continuing this discussion on our class blog, to which he responded, "It's clear that women belong in only the kitchen and the bedroom. What more is there to discuss?" It's so typical and expected at this point that it doesn't even get a chuckle, just an eye roll.

So I've been pondering gender roles and sexism a lot lately (before today), and I've come to one conclusion: it's tough being a woman. Now, I'm not asking for pity, because I'm really perfectly content with my gender, but if you look at it from an objective point of view, you'll see that woman have a lot of obstacles facing them. The primary obstacle, I think, is the struggle between maintaining a healthy sense of self (which includes acknowledgment of one's gender, sexuality, and femininity) and being viewed and treated as man's equal. As we talked about at the end of class (with the example of debate, but in the larger sense talking about school/business/etc.), women often feel compelled to use their sexuality to advance themselves in their field. I think this comes from the fact that women have an inferiority complex. And how could we not? Women earn 77 cents to every dollar that men earn. There has never been a woman president. Though the 2006 census tells us that 50.2% of the US population is female, women hold just 16.1% of the 535 seats in the 109th US Congress. Does any of that strike you as a little messed up? With staggering statistics like those, women feel that they HAVE to use their "womanly wiles" because it's the one thing they have that men don't. This, however, creates a problem because it perpetuates the belief that women aren't serious enough/are too emotional/(insert stereotype here) for X position.

But if you don't want to use your "womanly wiles," what alternative are you left with? Become a eunuch of sorts. Become asexual. You have to lose your femininity in order to get ahead. But is this fair? Can't I be a CEO AND express my happiness as a strong, confident woman by wearing tailored suits, stiletto heels, and a pretty perfume? When it comes to a woman's sexuality in the work place, why do we have such a "use it or lose it" mentality?

When it comes to racism vs. sexism I want to be clear that I'm not trying to make it into a "which is worse" sort of competition. Both are problems in our society today, and both need to be dealt with and eliminated. I just want everyone (especially Dan, Albert...and Laz, I guess) to consider this: do you think twice before making a racist joke to someone of a different race? I know I certainly do. I mean, I try not to make racist jokes at all, but, let's be honest, we all have. But I don't think anyone on this blog would go tell a Mexican person to go mow their lawn or a Black person to go pick some cotton, though those are well known stereotypes/racist jokes. But do you think twice before you make yet another joke about how women should "cook, clean, and conceive"? How about telling us that we're bad drivers/shouldn't be allowed to drive? How about calling us "woman," as in, "Go make my dinner, WOMAN"? I hear all of these things so often they've become commonplace. Like the anecdote above--I didn't laugh, I wasn't shocked or offended, I just rolled my eyes because it was so...expected. I know that most guys don't actually think women are the weaker sex, and that they know that we're capable drivers, but why are these jokes so prevalent then? Most people don't believe in the racist jokes they tell either, but yet these jokes are frowned upon. Sexist jokes are shouted triumphantly and get laughs and high fives from other guys. Why the discrepancy between these two types of discrimination? I just don't get it! "Wanna hear something funny? WOMEN'S RIGHTS!" Actually, that's not funny. Black men got the right to vote FIFTY YEARS before white women. Does that tell you something about our society? It's just crazy to me that a group that was subordinated for so long, even 88 years after given the right to vote, is still facing such overt sexism.

This post is so rambly, I'm sorry. But I have more to say...

The glass ceiling--will it ever be broken? Do women even want to break through it? Or are we so biologically driven to marry, have kids, raise our families that we are content to settle for a lower ranking position in order to have a more well-rounded life? How much does biological difference play in the gender roles of our society? How much of that whole "women are the nurtures, men are the hunters" is just BS? I'm not saying one way or another, because I really don't know. How many of you have moved because of a parent's job? How many have moved because of a mother's job? I'll take a guess and say zero. My family moved around the world (twice!) for my dad's job. Granted, in this situation (as in most family decisions) it was a choice my mom and dad made together. But really, how often do you hear of men uprooting their lives, quitting their jobs, and following their wife halfway around the world (or even just a few states over) so she can pursue her career ambitions?

Just an excerpt from a Gloria Steinem article in the Times about discrimination in the 2008 presidential race:
"So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects “only” the female half of the human race; because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more “masculine” for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren’t too many of them); and because there is still no “right” way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what."

I don't agree with everything in there, but I just thought it was interesting. (The full article is at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.html.)

I definitely have more to say on this topic, but I'm going to stop here. Sorry if this made no sense. It really is just one big rant, but I hope there are at least some good points/discussion starters in there.

Elizabeth Johnson said...

Correction Kelsie: the black man may have received the right to vote fifty years before woman, but the black man couldn't ACTUALLY vote until about fourty-five years after women (Voting Rights Act, 1965).

I don't know, I feel on the fence about the whole subject. Of course as a female I dislike the fact that sexism works against me and that in the workplace I will have to probably work twice as hard achieve the same benefits. But at the same time I embrace my femininity. If its going to help me get ahead, why not use it? There are both men and women that do much worse to get ahead.

Also, one of the things that I hate the most is people who try to downplay sexuality and genders in order to achieve equality. We were given gender, so we should NOT try to be asexual. People (many of them feminists) talk of achieving equality for all races/religions/genders/(fill in the blank), but this equality is a baseline equality that does not take into the account that these differences lead to different ways of thinking. Equality will never be reached if we just try to ignore our inherent differences and set some guidelines that everyone can achieve and call it "equality."

I don't really know where I'm going with that one right now...

Also, the glass ceiling -- Do I think it will be broken? I don't know... I hope so, but I don't feel I can commit to that one hundred percent, people are generally too self-serving. There are plenty of women, especially those in the workplace, who would love to break through the glass ceiling, but men are mostly in power in the corporate setting and will do whatever they can to stay in power (Marxism!). Though the common belief that women are here solely to produce male heirs has fallen to the wayside, we have not evolved enough to not have our biological clock anymore. I know many women who are holding down full-time, well-paying jobs who want to put those jobs aside because they feel their biological clocks "ticking" and are afraid they won't have any children before it runs out. They then put their careers on hold so they can have the joy of motherhood. But at the same time there are an increasing number of women who want to pursue their careers; these women decide not to have children (family sizes in America are on the decline!).

"How much does biological difference play in the gender roles of our society?"
I think biological differnces impact gender roles in our society the most! It is a proven fact that men and women think differently and approach problems and situations from a different perspective. Without our biological differences, there wouldn't even be GENDER let alone GENDER ROLES. We live in a traditional society so the traditional roles apply: women are gifted (or cursed, depends on your perspective) with the ability to reproduce. Naturally, the care of children by women follows. And men have greater physical strength which allows them to protect and provide for the family. These are ancient roles that are so ingrained in our society that it would take thousands of years for us to grow out of them. However we do see this trend on the decline, with more working mothers and stay-at-home dads.

Anyways...sorry if this is all rambly and whatnot. I'm sure you all will have something to say (*cough*Kelsie) about what I have written. And I'm sure we will get to further this lovely tangent in class tomorrow.

Albert said...

I'm pretty sure there was an article in BusinessWeek or something about like America's 100 most powerful women and there were a bunch of CEO's from major corporations in that list. So it would seem that the glass ceiling is already starting to fracture.

Going along with what Liz was saying, equality shouldn't be a blanket cure. We need to realize that it works in only certain situations (jobs, public office, etc). But at the same time, we need to embrace our differences.

Kelsie, your "use it or lose it" situation, to me, is kind of outdated. As I said, women are starting to get a strong foothold in the workplace. "Losing it" would be the extreme of what a woman would have to do to "succeed" in the workplace. Of course you can be a CEO and wear stilettos. You just need to find a middle ground.
And couldn't we say that women earn 77% of a man's salary because she's acting unprofessional (the whole wily ways thing)?

That's all for now.

Kelsie said...

"And couldn't we say that women earn 77% of a man's salary because she's acting unprofessional (the whole wily ways thing)?"

You can't possibly be serious about that. Oh, Albert, I had such high hopes for you.

I want really badly to respond, but I have yet to start a bio essay that's due tomorrow. Let's continue this in class, because I'd love to hear the others and Laz weigh in.

Theresa said...

Clearly, I am not a feminist. I know that I am guilty of using my gender to get what I want. It is simply a tool for my disposal.

Kelsie, you make some excellent points about the differences between accepting sexism and accepting racism. It is true that sexist jokes common, while most racist jokes are taboo in public. I think that trend is changing though. A signifigant amount of famous comedians base their act on racial relationships. I guess because opression of blacks and other races was physical and tangible, the bitterness that exists is more easily recognized by society. Oppression of women is not so well documented or quantifiable. Therefore, the resentments are more latent, and the jokes become more acceptable.

Like Liz said, I do not think we can ignore the fact that women and men are different. Biologically, women are less powerful, which enabled male domination in the first place. I agree that initially males were signifigantly involved in imposing a standard of beauty which pressured women to look pretty and act stupid. Today, howver, in this country, our plight is mainly self-imposed. We continue to wear the make-up, do our hair, and buy all the right outfits. Women are defining their own standard of beauty now, but their standards are just as harsh as the men's.

To be fair, women have made tremendous strides in the workplace. Inequalities may always exist because so many 'career' women have kids and do not return to their jobs. In a way, employers have a right to be suspicious. This generalization does make it much more difficult for women to get ahead. But we cannot just blame men for the problem. Ultimately, society should learn that the situation depends on the individual. Not all women have the life ambition to get knocked up and turn into a soccer mom. Not all men want women pregnant in the kitchen. The only problem is that this is a lesson no one knows how to teach. We are in the process of learning the hard way.

Anisha said...

I have absolutely no idea how this discussion got started in class, but I've been keeping up on these blog posts and find this conversation WAY to interesting not to chrip in...

I have mixed views on feminism. Feminists as a whole have a negative, bra-burning, screaming bitch kind of conotation. The true idea of a feminist, though, is someone who beleives in equal rights for men and women, which obviously isn't a bad thing.

Kelsie asked about how much of the "women are nurtures men gathers" is BS. This idea- women in the kitchen men in the forest- seems to put the forest ahead of the kitchen automatically. Why do we value the hunter more than the gatherer? I'd argue that American/the world (?) seems to value money/providing more than taking care of home. Why is this? You don't see men running into a "glass ceiling" running a home simply because it's not a valued job. But is it really more important? I guess that's debatable, but both jobs are necessary. Hunting/providing is needed for survival, but family/caring is needed to be human.

In terms of a glass ceiling, I'm don't think it'll ever be fully broken. I'm not a hundred percent sure, but here's something my mom once brought up to me:
You have a young man and a young woman of equal qualifications in the workplace. You have to pick one of them for a higher position, which is the stepping stone for rapidly moving up in the company. Who to pick?

If they are, in fact, relatively equal, here is the issue. You want someone who's going to stay and advance your company. Although you can't be sure, who's more likely to settle down and have kids? Even if it's a very driven woman, at the least, she's more likely to take off a year or a few months for childbirth. And although this is sterotypical, I think many of our mothers (more than dads) have taken off for our sick days, Halloween parades, etc. In terms of work capacity, isn't it better to higher the man then?

Anisha said...

Albert, I agree with your "middle ground" point - but we definately have not found it yet. I think there are too few women in the higher business world to have determined a proper "womanly" dresscode. You either look/dress asexual, or you're a slut.

"And couldn't we say that women earn 77% of a man's salary because she's acting unprofessional (the whole wily ways thing)?"

I'm gonna agree with Kelsie on this one. I don't think its fair to say that women are using their wiles to get to the top. Business is a competitive, cut-throat world. Had there been alot of hanky-panky, either a) it would have been more exposed or b) women would be making more money for doing their usual jobs and other "jobs".