I'm a feminist in a career and educational path that can be best described as traditionally "feminine." Due to the nature of our work, most rape crisis workers are female. Most of the counselors are female, too, and our statewide policy dictates that all first contact with a rape survivor must be done by a female advocate. I don't necessarily see any problem with that. As most rape survivors are women, I can see how it might be frightening for a survivor to have an advocate who was the same gender as her attacker.
That doesn't mean that there aren't men in the field. Quite the opposite. In my 5 years in advocacy, I've seen them in all levels of my work. Primarily, I've seen them in administrative roles, but I've also seen male advocates and counselors who work with children and men. I couldn't say that they were any less dedicated than their sisters in the field. Two of the crisis centers in the state even have male directors. It will always been a female-dominated field, and for good reason, but I'm glad to see more men wanting to help.
What I find interesting is people's response to the male advocates and crisis workers. When I talk about the women I work with, most people are politely interested and friendly in their responses. However, when I describe any of the men in the field, it seems like everybody is all ears! Effusive compliments for them abound, and everybody seems to want to know all about how they do the work and what keeps them going. And sooner or later, I get the inevitable, "Oh that's sooo wonderful and noble for him!"
Now don't get me wrong. I am hugely grateful for my brothers in advocacy, and I see recruiting and retaining them as an important priority. (Most male survivors are pretty grateful for an advocate they feel they can relate to.) They are definitely performing important work. In my experience, I remember some of the older advocates telling me about when it was considered shocking for a man to be employed at a crisis center...and being grateful times have changed.
However, I don't think it's necessarily only noble when a man does it. Sure, crisis intervention advocacy is predominantly female, but it's difficult and emotionally draining work for anyone of any gender. When I went through the training five years ago, I remember when some sections of it really were difficult for me to get through, and some of the workshops I've attended for my CEU's have also been pretty emotionally challenging. I'm sure I'm not the only female advocate who thinks that way. But I am in no way any more prepared or less noble when I do this simply because I am female. It's hard work for anyone to do. So why not celebrate all the advocates (not just the male ones)? Why not laud all of their investment in the work?
This then got me thinking about other predominantly female occupations, typically called "pink collar" jobs, such as teaching, librarianship, nursing, and counseling. These occupations are not exactly what you would call easy--all require some sort of license or advanced degree--and they require a good deal of education, skills, and emotional labor. There's no shame in someone wanting one of those jobs and taking the steps necessary to do so. However, I've noticed the same attitude towards men in these jobs as I have for the male advocates. There's usually a lot of praise heaped on them for doing something that's typically "female." However, I don't see the same amount of praise for women in these jobs. And again, it's still important and still pretty challenging work for anyone. It's no more or less just because of the gender of the person involved in it!
Perhaps the goal is to respect these service-related institutions and to laud those who dedicate their lives to them--regardless of their gender. Perhaps what we need to do is really understand what it takes to be in them and salute our brothers and sisters doing the work. Because it's important for all of us to care and to get involved.
Showing posts with label men. Show all posts
Showing posts with label men. Show all posts
Friday, January 13, 2012
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
I think I just threw up in my mouth...
Oh dear lord, I seriously need some ass-kicking radical feminist articles RIGHT NOW. Not material (though I identify as such), not liberal, not womanist, not eco. Radical. NOW. You heard me. I need the hardest stuff I can to get this yucky taste out of my mouth and mind!!
What is the matter?
I discovered this site purely by accident. It's the headquarters of the DABA Girls (Dating A Banker Anonymously),. They say they are a support group for women whose relationships have "tanked with the economy" because they're all involved with finance guys. The title page claims that this page is "free from the scrutiny of feminists." Well, too bad for you, DABAs. Apparantly you haven't met me because this feminist is gonna scrutinize you so bad you better be shaking in your Manolos.
So I've read many of the articles on your blog. Seems like you're all whining and moaning because your finance guy can't provide you with as generous an allowance as before. My favorite is the 24-year-old who's boyfriend is married. She's whining that he doesn't have time or money to lavish on her because his wife is checking up on their finances. Another lady, a beauty editor, brings up how her job is to keep her man sane during the recession and to live according to what he wants. Another article describes how DABA ladies used to be "admired for their class" and style. Well, I might not have much of it myself, but really, whining about that stuff shows that they have no class whatsoever. Did they ever think that they might be doing better than a whole lot of other people? Do they have lives aside of being some rich guy's arm candy? And do any of these ladies work? I don't know for sure, but something in me tells me not.
I could vent on and on, but I'd suggest you see what I'm talking about. Be sure you haven't just eaten because this will make you SICK. I don't know about you, but people like this make me want to sentence them to a couple thousand mandated hours at CWIT (Center for Women in Transition, the homeless shelter for women). Or A Woman's Place. You know, if the situations don't kick your butt, then the domestics surely will.
What is the matter?
I discovered this site purely by accident. It's the headquarters of the DABA Girls (Dating A Banker Anonymously),
So I've read many of the articles on your blog. Seems like you're all whining and moaning because your finance guy can't provide you with as generous an allowance as before. My favorite is the 24-year-old who's boyfriend is married. She's whining that he doesn't have time or money to lavish on her because his wife is checking up on their finances. Another lady, a beauty editor, brings up how her job is to keep her man sane during the recession and to live according to what he wants. Another article describes how DABA ladies used to be "admired for their class" and style. Well, I might not have much of it myself, but really, whining about that stuff shows that they have no class whatsoever. Did they ever think that they might be doing better than a whole lot of other people? Do they have lives aside of being some rich guy's arm candy? And do any of these ladies work? I don't know for sure, but something in me tells me not.
I could vent on and on, but I'd suggest you see what I'm talking about. Be sure you haven't just eaten because this will make you SICK. I don't know about you, but people like this make me want to sentence them to a couple thousand mandated hours at CWIT (Center for Women in Transition, the homeless shelter for women). Or A Woman's Place. You know, if the situations don't kick your butt, then the domestics surely will.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Why you should marry a doormat
Hey guys! This post is all for you!
From my title, I just wanted to expand on my special message for you and let you know that if you're intending to marry a strong, capable, talented woman who can be your equal in almost every regard, snap out of it right away. Get that stupid pipe dream out of your head. You will be destined to live a crappy life if you do. Go and find yourself a demure, submissive little thing who will be more than happy to do your bidding instead of a high-powered career grl partner. I mean it! Does your girlfriend live up to that submissive ideal? No? Then drop her and get a new one! You heard me! NOW!!
So apparantly the esteemed magazine, Forbes, has published a list called "Careers and Marriage: Don't Marry Career Women." This article (by a guy, of course) claims that women, work, and family just don't mix. One of them has got to go if you would like your lady to be a good wife for you. And this is according to big strong social scientists. I mean, after all, how can SCIENCE be wrong?? This article delves into the classic problem of mixing a family with work (as one of my personal favorites, Gloria Steinem, put it, "I have yet to hear a man ask me how to combine work with a family.")
Don't believe me? Well, here are the major points, with my annotation in italics.
1. If they quit their jobs and stay at home with the kids, they'll be unhappy.
Well, if you are controlling and bossy and make your wife quit a job she enjoyed, then of course she'd be unhappy. No one likes men who are bossy and mean.
Well, if you are controlling and bossy and make your wife quit a job she enjoyed, then of course she'd be unhappy. No one likes men who are bossy and mean.
2. They will be unhappy if they make more money than you do.
How is this the case? I think that the only time she'll be unhappy about money is if you two don't have any or enough!
How is this the case? I think that the only time she'll be unhappy about money is if you two don't have any or enough!
3. You will be unhappy if they make more money than you do.
Then you need to either get over yourself or get a promotion. Is your sense of self-worth so fragile that it's attached to a number on a paycheck?
Then you need to either get over yourself or get a promotion. Is your sense of self-worth so fragile that it's attached to a number on a paycheck?
4. You will be more likely to fall ill.
Um, doesn't everyone get sick at some point or another? Career women and their partners get sick, just like unemployed women and their partners.
Um, doesn't everyone get sick at some point or another? Career women and their partners get sick, just like unemployed women and their partners.
5. Even your house will be dirtier.
Then I have a solution. If you and your wage-earning wife are concerned about the home, hire a housekeeper! With your wife outearning you, you guys can afford one. Or teach your kids the importance of chores and give them an allowance for cleaning up after themselves.
Then I have a solution. If you and your wage-earning wife are concerned about the home, hire a housekeeper! With your wife outearning you, you guys can afford one. Or teach your kids the importance of chores and give them an allowance for cleaning up after themselves.
6. Professional women are less likely to have children.
Yeah, but we're all different, aren't we? Some of us want kids, and some of us do not. And there are some of us, myself included, that think adoption is the way to go. Maybe we just want to make our careers secure before having a family. There are so many of us that you can't just generalize like that.
Yeah, but we're all different, aren't we? Some of us want kids, and some of us do not. And there are some of us, myself included, that think adoption is the way to go. Maybe we just want to make our careers secure before having a family. There are so many of us that you can't just generalize like that.
7. Professional women are more likely to get divorced.
Well, if we're married to a mean and chauvinistic pig like the writer of this article, then sure we'll serve him with a big fat divorce. Because no one likes being with someone like that! And a statement like that only shows that professional women are just like the rest of the American population--because over half the MARRIAGES in general wind up in divorce!
Did you hear that, guys? So if you're worried about how your partner acts and how it will impact your family (and if you have less than one working brain cell), then drop her now and marry your Welcome mat. You might look funny saying your wedding vows to it at the altar or the courthouse, but the mat is not going to steal your precious manhood! But if you think Forbes is being silly with these rules, then keep that partner and enjoy having someone you can be equal to and who can hold her own with you!
Well, if we're married to a mean and chauvinistic pig like the writer of this article, then sure we'll serve him with a big fat divorce. Because no one likes being with someone like that! And a statement like that only shows that professional women are just like the rest of the American population--because over half the MARRIAGES in general wind up in divorce!
Did you hear that, guys? So if you're worried about how your partner acts and how it will impact your family (and if you have less than one working brain cell), then drop her now and marry your Welcome mat. You might look funny saying your wedding vows to it at the altar or the courthouse, but the mat is not going to steal your precious manhood! But if you think Forbes is being silly with these rules, then keep that partner and enjoy having someone you can be equal to and who can hold her own with you!
Monday, December 1, 2008
Walk this way! Walk this way! Just gimme a kiss!
Got your attention, didn't I?
One thing I love doing is taking some of my guilty pleasure songs and re-working them to fit my point of view. By guilty pleasure, I mean the ones that I could rarely, if ever, relate to. Take any testosterone-fueled sausagefest male-oriented rock number, be it AC/DC or Aerosmith or Nine Inch Nails or even some Led Zeppelin and you know what I mean. Then I rework them from my hetero female perspective, as a "let me do this to a man" sort of thing.
When I saw Heart back in 2006 at Summerfest (see them if you get the chance, they just keep getting better), their encores were a pair of Led Zeppelin songs. Now they sound a lot like Zep does already, but these two songs were something of a surprise. For they were ones clearly from a guy's point of view, "Black Dog" and "Whole Lotta Love." As I was wondering how they were going to pull it off, Ann Wilson (the lead singer) showed her creative side and added these lyrics to the former--"I don't know what you've been told-- you think a pretty woman ain't got no soul" and "Now all I ask for when I pray, that a lovin' little woman won't come your way. Don't you need a woman to hold your hand, tell you no lies, make you a happy man?" The audience roared, and I have to say I liked that as an encore. It paid homage and talked back, which I think is awesome. The three times I saw Joan Jett and her lovely Blackhearts, they took a lot of songs previously associated with guy singers and did them. Which totally worked, especially when sandwiched in with songs like "Androgynous" and "ACDC (She Got Some Other Lover As Well As Me)." Even the more raucous acts nowadays wouldn't have the nerve to cover "Do You Wanna Touch Me?" or "Star Star," let alone rework them from a female standpoint ("you know you're my man, I'm doin' all I can, my temperature is runnin' high") AND pull it off!
It is incredibly fun entertainment.
I like the whole gender-bending (or blending?) nature of it. It's only fair for a woman to take a song and make it her own, as opposed to imagining herself being the girl the male singer is talking about (and I'm sorry, but much as I like their songs, I would rather NOT be the female in NIN's "Closer," for starters!). Take some of the control and the artistic expression and make it one's own. Plus, it just makes it more fun for the female audiophile.
One thing I love doing is taking some of my guilty pleasure songs and re-working them to fit my point of view. By guilty pleasure, I mean the ones that I could rarely, if ever, relate to. Take any testosterone-fueled sausagefest male-oriented rock number, be it AC/DC or Aerosmith or Nine Inch Nails or even some Led Zeppelin and you know what I mean. Then I rework them from my hetero female perspective, as a "let me do this to a man" sort of thing.
When I saw Heart back in 2006 at Summerfest (see them if you get the chance, they just keep getting better), their encores were a pair of Led Zeppelin songs. Now they sound a lot like Zep does already, but these two songs were something of a surprise. For they were ones clearly from a guy's point of view, "Black Dog" and "Whole Lotta Love." As I was wondering how they were going to pull it off, Ann Wilson (the lead singer) showed her creative side and added these lyrics to the former--"I don't know what you've been told-- you think a pretty woman ain't got no soul" and "Now all I ask for when I pray, that a lovin' little woman won't come your way. Don't you need a woman to hold your hand, tell you no lies, make you a happy man?" The audience roared, and I have to say I liked that as an encore. It paid homage and talked back, which I think is awesome. The three times I saw Joan Jett and her lovely Blackhearts, they took a lot of songs previously associated with guy singers and did them. Which totally worked, especially when sandwiched in with songs like "Androgynous" and "ACDC (She Got Some Other Lover As Well As Me)." Even the more raucous acts nowadays wouldn't have the nerve to cover "Do You Wanna Touch Me?" or "Star Star," let alone rework them from a female standpoint ("you know you're my man, I'm doin' all I can, my temperature is runnin' high") AND pull it off!
It is incredibly fun entertainment.
I like the whole gender-bending (or blending?) nature of it. It's only fair for a woman to take a song and make it her own, as opposed to imagining herself being the girl the male singer is talking about (and I'm sorry, but much as I like their songs, I would rather NOT be the female in NIN's "Closer," for starters!). Take some of the control and the artistic expression and make it one's own. Plus, it just makes it more fun for the female audiophile.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
That's sooo last century!
I was looking through a magazine to find some more jewelry ideas so I could make some new designs when I went home (need to bring some to 40 North to see if they'll include me in the Boneyard). And what did I find? Not too much in the way of jewelry (sadly!), but I did find a ridiculous fashion spread. Yes, I'm a fashionista, but this is beyond silly. It featured a ton of ladies in sweaters and softer clothes, but it also included these archaic quotes in there...
"It is assumed that the woman must wait motionless until she is wooed. That is how the spider waits for the fly." --George Bernard Shaw
"A woman can say more in a sigh than a man can say in a sermon." --Arnold Haultain
"I have a feeling that the phrase 'weaker sex' was created by some woman to disarm a man she was preparing to overwhelm." --Ogden Nash
Maybe I'm a little biased because about half my wardrobe is secondhand or revel stuff, and I could probably never afford the duds in the magazine. I don't know about you, though, but all of these quotes would more likely make me not want to buy these clothes. The thought of being motionless and sighing (as opposed to talking) kind of scares me. And did you notice that they're all by men?? It's so obvious that they're about how an idealized woman would act as opposed to how she actually does. Hmmmm.....
"It is assumed that the woman must wait motionless until she is wooed. That is how the spider waits for the fly." --George Bernard Shaw
"A woman can say more in a sigh than a man can say in a sermon." --Arnold Haultain
"I have a feeling that the phrase 'weaker sex' was created by some woman to disarm a man she was preparing to overwhelm." --Ogden Nash
Maybe I'm a little biased because about half my wardrobe is secondhand or revel stuff, and I could probably never afford the duds in the magazine. I don't know about you, though, but all of these quotes would more likely make me not want to buy these clothes. The thought of being motionless and sighing (as opposed to talking) kind of scares me. And did you notice that they're all by men?? It's so obvious that they're about how an idealized woman would act as opposed to how she actually does. Hmmmm.....
Sunday, November 2, 2008
You don't really wanna mess with me tonight.
I always found this situation to be ironic, yet highly annoying. Over the summer, I would get off of work at La Casa, feeling all fired up and ready to save the whole world. I'd have finished a database, a court watch, or some development work, and I would be feeling like I just rode into town with my sh*tkicking boots (or in this case, dress flats to fit the La Casa dress code) on, all ready to save the world. Then, as I'd walk to the local library where my sister was working, I'd invariably pass some construction site or other group of guys, and I'd hear the shouts of "Hey baby!" or whistles or some related bullshit like that. I've never found that stuff flattering, and usually I'd just ignore it or outright tell them to shut up if I got really annoyed. I usually don't have qualms about putting someone (particularly a man) in their place.
I love going out now that I'm back at school. I pride myself on always knowing someone whenever I go to an event, and I almost always have someone to go with. It's fun and the perfect way to spend my weekends. This October, I saw two big-name acts, kd lang and Amy Ray, and I picked up some of the basics of Latin dance at Distinto Y Diferente (Latin nights at Cowboy Monkey and Great Impasta--loads of fun with really energetic music). I'm totally loving the whole "see and be seen" aspect of it. Plus, who doesn't love salsa music??
My main issue is with the rest of the crowd, especially the guys there. Granted, I love my guy friends and many of the males I meet are perfectly okay. It's just a few that really bother me, but unfortunately they're so persistant and downright annoying that I have a hard time just ignoring them. I'm no prude--I am definitely as forward as they come, I'm rather frank about most things, and I'm usually pretty friendly to most. It's just...that too many people take it in the wrong direction or misinterpret it or think that I'll be more than happy to go home with them (when in reality, it's usually the contrary!). And that bothers me. What is it that makes those guys feel that they're so entitled? Is it the fact that I just happen to be the proud owner of two ovaries and just happen to be there? Is it because I am (shock*gasp) a woman who happens to have left her place for the night and ventured out into the big mean world? Is it because they can? What is it?
One time when I went dancing at the Canopy during a Zmick show (I like Zmick, especially when they dedicate a song to me! never knew I'd grow to love such a schmaltzy song like "Sexy Crazy"!). And like always, I was my sparkly self. (I can put any self-respecting glam rocker to shame with the amount of glitter I have and wear when I'm out. Maybe I was a female glam rocker in another life. Who knows? That's totally my musical and fashion guilty pleasure!) So I was dancing around to "Interrogation," and like always, it was really crowded. The guy behind me just grabs one of my hips to get me closer and to start grinding against me. Now that was just plain gross! I don't have anything against grinding, but to have someone you can't even see just grabbing you and rubbing his cock up against you like that is pretty darn creepy! So I snatched his hand and yanked it off my hip and then darted right up close to the stage where he wouldn't fit. Then at Latin night, I saw a guy who happens to run in many of the same circles as me (scenester, artistic, even knows some monologists and advocates). So I made some small talk with him, and within minutes he was trying to get me to go home with him. IN FRONT OF MY FRIENDS. This is a guy who (1) knows I have a boyfriend, (2) is twelve, twelve, TWELVE (12) years older than me, (3) turned out to be incredibly arrogant. Any of those is a bad thing on its own, but combine 'em and you've got a nasty case on your hands. I told him I was staying at the club with my friends (thanks guys!) and not going with him. So he backed off, but whenever I see him, he says "My offer still stands." What part of no don't you understand??? Do you really have so little self-control that you can't keep your mouth shut and stay away when someone is clearly trying to avoid you? One time, he came up to me when I was with two of my feminists, one male and one female, and they automatically flanked me. Like they could sense what a man-slut he was. But really, what makes him think he is so entitled?
Flirtation isn't the problem. I know I'm an extrovert and will talk to anyone and everyone. And I will dance with almost anyone. It just bothers me because it seems as though I just can't get them off of my case. I feel like I'm being punished, that I always have to be on my guard because (a) I'm female and (2) I am in a public place and not hidden away from view. I am both seen AND heard. I'm not going to stop going out. That's the last thing I would want to do. I suppose I could lay off the glitter and the revealing clothes and dress like a stereotypical frumpy female nerd and not go out. But then I wouldn't be happy. I'd be so miserable I wouldn't know what to do with myself! Scenesters need the scene! So what should change?
I have talked about this to some of my friends, but it seems as though we all can't figure out the reason for it. But they do have some funny remedies for it! My friend DoMonique suggested bringing a dagger along (and she has a Facebook group about it. She calls it a rape dagger if it is used on an attacker). But really, I need to be serious here. What is the issue? Is it me? Or is it the men? My parents tell me that if I know guys will be doing that, then maybe I should do something else that night. But I don't want to let other people make me afraid. I'm a lot stronger and tougher, and as we all know, I don't stay down and in easily. My roommate tells me to "be careful" when I'm in any group that might just include males. But I have a lot of guy friends, I see them almost every day, and I can assure you that most of them respect me and don't pull that shit on me. Then some folks just take it to the extreme! For one example, when I saw my MASV friends at a club once, I went over to talk to them. And right away, one of my other friends (you know who you are!) thought they were ALL hitting on me (it was really just an animated conversation) and rushed over to butt in ask me if I wanted to dance. While we were out on the floor, he was asking me, "So Alex, about those five guys who were hitting on you...It sure is a good thing I came in and bailed you out" to which I replied, "They weren't hitting on me. They're my MASV guys; I'm friends with them all. That's it, really." Of course it doesn't help that that acronym is pronounced like "massive," because then it sounded REALLY wrong! But they weren't hitting on me, and I certainly wouldn't want to alienate people who are my friends just because they own a Y chromosome and are friendly towards me.
But where do you draw the line? Does one avoid guys altogether and only spend time with one's female friends and/or partner? Or do the guys have to change? Or am I really too flamboyant and forward for my own good? Is it a combination of it all? And in that case, what's a revel grl to do? Personally, I think that while I can do my best to combat those actions and mindsets, the real change has to be with the men. Start thinking with your other head for once. Would you want your mother or sister to be grabbed or propositioned by some drunk college guys with bad B.O.? I'm not against being friendly or flirtatious or anything like that, but sometimes enough is...well, enough.
I love going out now that I'm back at school. I pride myself on always knowing someone whenever I go to an event, and I almost always have someone to go with. It's fun and the perfect way to spend my weekends. This October, I saw two big-name acts, kd lang and Amy Ray, and I picked up some of the basics of Latin dance at Distinto Y Diferente (Latin nights at Cowboy Monkey and Great Impasta--loads of fun with really energetic music). I'm totally loving the whole "see and be seen" aspect of it. Plus, who doesn't love salsa music??
My main issue is with the rest of the crowd, especially the guys there. Granted, I love my guy friends and many of the males I meet are perfectly okay. It's just a few that really bother me, but unfortunately they're so persistant and downright annoying that I have a hard time just ignoring them. I'm no prude--I am definitely as forward as they come, I'm rather frank about most things, and I'm usually pretty friendly to most. It's just...that too many people take it in the wrong direction or misinterpret it or think that I'll be more than happy to go home with them (when in reality, it's usually the contrary!). And that bothers me. What is it that makes those guys feel that they're so entitled? Is it the fact that I just happen to be the proud owner of two ovaries and just happen to be there? Is it because I am (shock*gasp) a woman who happens to have left her place for the night and ventured out into the big mean world? Is it because they can? What is it?
One time when I went dancing at the Canopy during a Zmick show (I like Zmick, especially when they dedicate a song to me! never knew I'd grow to love such a schmaltzy song like "Sexy Crazy"!). And like always, I was my sparkly self. (I can put any self-respecting glam rocker to shame with the amount of glitter I have and wear when I'm out. Maybe I was a female glam rocker in another life. Who knows? That's totally my musical and fashion guilty pleasure!) So I was dancing around to "Interrogation," and like always, it was really crowded. The guy behind me just grabs one of my hips to get me closer and to start grinding against me. Now that was just plain gross! I don't have anything against grinding, but to have someone you can't even see just grabbing you and rubbing his cock up against you like that is pretty darn creepy! So I snatched his hand and yanked it off my hip and then darted right up close to the stage where he wouldn't fit. Then at Latin night, I saw a guy who happens to run in many of the same circles as me (scenester, artistic, even knows some monologists and advocates). So I made some small talk with him, and within minutes he was trying to get me to go home with him. IN FRONT OF MY FRIENDS. This is a guy who (1) knows I have a boyfriend, (2) is twelve, twelve, TWELVE (12) years older than me, (3) turned out to be incredibly arrogant. Any of those is a bad thing on its own, but combine 'em and you've got a nasty case on your hands. I told him I was staying at the club with my friends (thanks guys!) and not going with him. So he backed off, but whenever I see him, he says "My offer still stands." What part of no don't you understand??? Do you really have so little self-control that you can't keep your mouth shut and stay away when someone is clearly trying to avoid you? One time, he came up to me when I was with two of my feminists, one male and one female, and they automatically flanked me. Like they could sense what a man-slut he was. But really, what makes him think he is so entitled?
Flirtation isn't the problem. I know I'm an extrovert and will talk to anyone and everyone. And I will dance with almost anyone. It just bothers me because it seems as though I just can't get them off of my case. I feel like I'm being punished, that I always have to be on my guard because (a) I'm female and (2) I am in a public place and not hidden away from view. I am both seen AND heard. I'm not going to stop going out. That's the last thing I would want to do. I suppose I could lay off the glitter and the revealing clothes and dress like a stereotypical frumpy female nerd and not go out. But then I wouldn't be happy. I'd be so miserable I wouldn't know what to do with myself! Scenesters need the scene! So what should change?
I have talked about this to some of my friends, but it seems as though we all can't figure out the reason for it. But they do have some funny remedies for it! My friend DoMonique suggested bringing a dagger along (and she has a Facebook group about it. She calls it a rape dagger if it is used on an attacker). But really, I need to be serious here. What is the issue? Is it me? Or is it the men? My parents tell me that if I know guys will be doing that, then maybe I should do something else that night. But I don't want to let other people make me afraid. I'm a lot stronger and tougher, and as we all know, I don't stay down and in easily. My roommate tells me to "be careful" when I'm in any group that might just include males. But I have a lot of guy friends, I see them almost every day, and I can assure you that most of them respect me and don't pull that shit on me. Then some folks just take it to the extreme! For one example, when I saw my MASV friends at a club once, I went over to talk to them. And right away, one of my other friends (you know who you are!) thought they were ALL hitting on me (it was really just an animated conversation) and rushed over to butt in ask me if I wanted to dance. While we were out on the floor, he was asking me, "So Alex, about those five guys who were hitting on you...It sure is a good thing I came in and bailed you out" to which I replied, "They weren't hitting on me. They're my MASV guys; I'm friends with them all. That's it, really." Of course it doesn't help that that acronym is pronounced like "massive," because then it sounded REALLY wrong! But they weren't hitting on me, and I certainly wouldn't want to alienate people who are my friends just because they own a Y chromosome and are friendly towards me.
But where do you draw the line? Does one avoid guys altogether and only spend time with one's female friends and/or partner? Or do the guys have to change? Or am I really too flamboyant and forward for my own good? Is it a combination of it all? And in that case, what's a revel grl to do? Personally, I think that while I can do my best to combat those actions and mindsets, the real change has to be with the men. Start thinking with your other head for once. Would you want your mother or sister to be grabbed or propositioned by some drunk college guys with bad B.O.? I'm not against being friendly or flirtatious or anything like that, but sometimes enough is...well, enough.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
And all I gotta do is...act naturally
I am taking this one class that I particularly love. It's called "Bodies and Technologies in Popular Culture," and it is great fun. We take all of this pop-psychology/biology stuff and then rip its logic into a billion little bits and prove it as wrong as wearing socks with sandals or raising a fuss over Y2K.
This class could not have come at a better time for me. It has always fascinated (as well as annoyed!) me when I hear people talking about how certain groups act this way and other groups act that way because "it's in their nature." From listening to folks like these, you'd think all humans consisted of were animalistic, base instincts and uncontrollable urges...and nothing more. All nature. No culture. And if anything, the 21st century has a combination of the most amazing cultures the world has ever seen; yet we still have some pretty darn vocal voices saying that people only behave in the way "their nature" dictates they should. Even more ridiculous is when folks start using examples from nature to illustrate why certain things are the way they are.
Phrases like those are not limited to today. Throughout history, we have seen discrimination unfold just because the dominant group (read: heterosexual, well-off, middle-aged white males) saw it as each of the minority groups' "natural place" to be below them. The folks who opposed abolition back in the 1800s used the disgusting argument that it was simply in the nature of the blacks to toil for long hours without any recompensation or humane treatment. And the disgusting practice continued until it was formally outlawed at the federal level. Women were first considered the property of either their husbands or their fathers, and they were encouraged to limit their life goals to "wife and mother" because (big surprise) they were told it was natural. (While there is nothing wrong with getting married and having kids, there is everything wrong with pushing that on everyone and not allowing them to have any dreams that happen to be different.)
The above historical examples sound horrendously antiquated, don't they? Then why do we still hear cr*p like that nowadays? Ladies' mags churn out new "scientific findings" justifying all kinds of BS: that men are "hard-wired" to cheat because it's in their instincts to produce as many offspring as possible (which is a little insulting to men, don't you think?), that women can sense when things are going wrong from the onset of something, that bad boys get more action because women are hard-wired not to resist them, etc. etc. Stuff like this is patronizing at best (by saying that basically we're just a bunch of raging hormones/instincts and not much else) and gross at worst. That first example, about how people are "instinctively" wired to want to procreate as much as possible has been used to justify a ton of hideous and completely untrue claims. At Sex Out Loud, the chastity group told Planned Parenthood (what were they thinking saying this to Planned Parenthood???) that contraceptives interfered with women's innate desire to be sexually pure (funny, I don't see anyone having a relationship with the actual pill) and yet also interfered with their "natural" role to bear children. Hmmm. I would have thought thinking and making one's own decisions was "natural" (including knowing when/if you wanted to reproduce). Then, at an RCS-sponsored event, one of the male advocates and I were fielding questions from the audience, and this one idiot stood up and was telling us that our rape victim advocacy work was conflicting with men's "biological nature" to father as many children as possible, even if it was by force. I was all set to let that guy have it, but before I could do anything, my cohort verbally eviscerated the sexist pig, saying that his views were really unfair to men as well as women! (I think it meant more coming from another guy, and Jack did one heckuva job as always.) I've also heard from well-meaning (I think?) individuals that because something existed in the animal kingdom, it was true for humans. Statements about how male animals are the aggressive and strong ones and that female ones are the nurturing ones. It makes me wonder if they have confused the species, because last time I checked, people are quite different from wild animals.
My response has usually been, "Okay, I think we've all evolved since then." I honestly don't think humanity is in a stagnant state that never changes, and if you know anything about history, you know that it is simply full of changes (good lord, that's a lot of change--I must be sounding like Barack Obama or something!). Or I say that I think we have more than just a bundle of instincts and hormones. In response to the animal thing, I've usually counter it with some witty (and sometimes crass) remarks that are just as true. You wanna talk about how males are dominant in nature? Let me tell you about nature! With lions, the lionesses do the hunting and are the stronger and fiercer ones. And with some kinds of bugs the female mates with the male and then eats him! (You should see the look I get for that one!)
Maybe people like those could be right in a way. By being so unenlightened, maybe they're the ones who haven't evolved and who haven't used much more than their instincts and big mouths. But really, you'd think statements like those would be deemed as the ridiculosity they are and not accepted at face value.
This class could not have come at a better time for me. It has always fascinated (as well as annoyed!) me when I hear people talking about how certain groups act this way and other groups act that way because "it's in their nature." From listening to folks like these, you'd think all humans consisted of were animalistic, base instincts and uncontrollable urges...and nothing more. All nature. No culture. And if anything, the 21st century has a combination of the most amazing cultures the world has ever seen; yet we still have some pretty darn vocal voices saying that people only behave in the way "their nature" dictates they should. Even more ridiculous is when folks start using examples from nature to illustrate why certain things are the way they are.
Phrases like those are not limited to today. Throughout history, we have seen discrimination unfold just because the dominant group (read: heterosexual, well-off, middle-aged white males) saw it as each of the minority groups' "natural place" to be below them. The folks who opposed abolition back in the 1800s used the disgusting argument that it was simply in the nature of the blacks to toil for long hours without any recompensation or humane treatment. And the disgusting practice continued until it was formally outlawed at the federal level. Women were first considered the property of either their husbands or their fathers, and they were encouraged to limit their life goals to "wife and mother" because (big surprise) they were told it was natural. (While there is nothing wrong with getting married and having kids, there is everything wrong with pushing that on everyone and not allowing them to have any dreams that happen to be different.)
The above historical examples sound horrendously antiquated, don't they? Then why do we still hear cr*p like that nowadays? Ladies' mags churn out new "scientific findings" justifying all kinds of BS: that men are "hard-wired" to cheat because it's in their instincts to produce as many offspring as possible (which is a little insulting to men, don't you think?), that women can sense when things are going wrong from the onset of something, that bad boys get more action because women are hard-wired not to resist them, etc. etc. Stuff like this is patronizing at best (by saying that basically we're just a bunch of raging hormones/instincts and not much else) and gross at worst. That first example, about how people are "instinctively" wired to want to procreate as much as possible has been used to justify a ton of hideous and completely untrue claims. At Sex Out Loud, the chastity group told Planned Parenthood (what were they thinking saying this to Planned Parenthood???) that contraceptives interfered with women's innate desire to be sexually pure (funny, I don't see anyone having a relationship with the actual pill) and yet also interfered with their "natural" role to bear children. Hmmm. I would have thought thinking and making one's own decisions was "natural" (including knowing when/if you wanted to reproduce). Then, at an RCS-sponsored event, one of the male advocates and I were fielding questions from the audience, and this one idiot stood up and was telling us that our rape victim advocacy work was conflicting with men's "biological nature" to father as many children as possible, even if it was by force. I was all set to let that guy have it, but before I could do anything, my cohort verbally eviscerated the sexist pig, saying that his views were really unfair to men as well as women! (I think it meant more coming from another guy, and Jack did one heckuva job as always.) I've also heard from well-meaning (I think?) individuals that because something existed in the animal kingdom, it was true for humans. Statements about how male animals are the aggressive and strong ones and that female ones are the nurturing ones. It makes me wonder if they have confused the species, because last time I checked, people are quite different from wild animals.
My response has usually been, "Okay, I think we've all evolved since then." I honestly don't think humanity is in a stagnant state that never changes, and if you know anything about history, you know that it is simply full of changes (good lord, that's a lot of change--I must be sounding like Barack Obama or something!). Or I say that I think we have more than just a bundle of instincts and hormones. In response to the animal thing, I've usually counter it with some witty (and sometimes crass) remarks that are just as true. You wanna talk about how males are dominant in nature? Let me tell you about nature! With lions, the lionesses do the hunting and are the stronger and fiercer ones. And with some kinds of bugs the female mates with the male and then eats him! (You should see the look I get for that one!)
Maybe people like those could be right in a way. By being so unenlightened, maybe they're the ones who haven't evolved and who haven't used much more than their instincts and big mouths. But really, you'd think statements like those would be deemed as the ridiculosity they are and not accepted at face value.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
