So, I have to blame the pregnant man for this rant, not that I have any issues with him, but my roommate does apparently. Which is what brought up this entire issue. My roommate argued quite passionately for the maintaining of the divide between genders. He argued that he was a liar because the pregnant man's chromosomes didn't match that of a typical man (XX vs XY).
My stance on the issue is both that there is no such thing as Male or Female, but a sliding scale or spectrum of the two. Just as there are degrees of sexual preference, and that almost no one is 100% purely strait or gay, gender is much the same way. To the extent that there is no such thing as a pure or "real" man and a pure or "real" woman.
Of course his whole and entire argument lies on the basis that there is a chromosomal difference between biological males and females. While he is content to say that difference is the sole and only judgment for male and female, I do not agree. I say that a persons gender (be it role, identity, or other entirely) is much more determined by a persons behavior, personality, habits, culture, etc. Rather than look at a single aspect of a persons genetics, I think it is more true to look at the entire picture of aspects, and I don't think that one aspect of a person's DNA is the end all be all criterion for the basis of gender.
That said, why does that have to do with the criminality of being female in this country? Well as my roommate passionately went on about what it meant to be male and how the pregnant man isn't one, his debate began to confirm a position I've had for a while. That being that it is a crime to be female in this country. Now I don't mean it in a way that you will go to jail and be prosecuted. I mean it in that everything in this country revolves around men, masculinity, and anyone who is less than that, or appears to be less, is cast down, ridiculed, oppressed, or discriminated against.
Think about this, why are women still less than 1% of executive officers, despite earning half of all the masters degrees in this country, and being half of the workforce (source: Economist.com). Why are FTM (Female to Male) transexuals less scrutinized than their MTF counterparts, why are femme lesbians admired but butch lesbians shunned? In this country, masculinity is worshipped, and anything that appeals to masculinity is admired. So a MTF transsexual is shunned for casting off masculinity, a femme lesbian is approved of because she becoming more masculine (being attracted to women) while still retaining her attraction AS a woman. Compare that to masculine lesbians, who are not nearly given as much limelight or compassion for their ways of life.
Just a bit of an annoyance of mine on an observation, that it seems as long as you have a penis, or are attractive to one, you are alright. But the second you denounce one, you are cast off by this society.
What do you think? Am I way off base? Or do I ring a true tune.
))
My stance on the issue is both that there is no such thing as Male or Female, but a sliding scale or spectrum of the two. Just as there are degrees of sexual preference, and that almost no one is 100% purely strait or gay, gender is much the same way. To the extent that there is no such thing as a pure or "real" man and a pure or "real" woman.
Of course his whole and entire argument lies on the basis that there is a chromosomal difference between biological males and females. While he is content to say that difference is the sole and only judgment for male and female, I do not agree. I say that a persons gender (be it role, identity, or other entirely) is much more determined by a persons behavior, personality, habits, culture, etc. Rather than look at a single aspect of a persons genetics, I think it is more true to look at the entire picture of aspects, and I don't think that one aspect of a person's DNA is the end all be all criterion for the basis of gender.
That said, why does that have to do with the criminality of being female in this country? Well as my roommate passionately went on about what it meant to be male and how the pregnant man isn't one, his debate began to confirm a position I've had for a while. That being that it is a crime to be female in this country. Now I don't mean it in a way that you will go to jail and be prosecuted. I mean it in that everything in this country revolves around men, masculinity, and anyone who is less than that, or appears to be less, is cast down, ridiculed, oppressed, or discriminated against.
Think about this, why are women still less than 1% of executive officers, despite earning half of all the masters degrees in this country, and being half of the workforce (source: Economist.com). Why are FTM (Female to Male) transexuals less scrutinized than their MTF counterparts, why are femme lesbians admired but butch lesbians shunned? In this country, masculinity is worshipped, and anything that appeals to masculinity is admired. So a MTF transsexual is shunned for casting off masculinity, a femme lesbian is approved of because she becoming more masculine (being attracted to women) while still retaining her attraction AS a woman. Compare that to masculine lesbians, who are not nearly given as much limelight or compassion for their ways of life.
Just a bit of an annoyance of mine on an observation, that it seems as long as you have a penis, or are attractive to one, you are alright. But the second you denounce one, you are cast off by this society.
What do you think? Am I way off base? Or do I ring a true tune.
))
Having been a female all my life I understand what it is to be a minority and discriminated against. What is almost worse to me than gender discrimination is when other races, who complain of persecution, exhibit a special brand of prejudice for the "barbie doll" -- supposedly an ideal in our culture that they feel they can never fit with their gid given physical features.
ReplyDeleteI have also been privilaged beyond others - other females, males, other races, income levels etc based on the very same criteria - being an atractive, well spoken, well behaved female.
Nothing illustrated this to me more profoundly than when I was welcomed into the Ritz hotel in sweatpants with no make up and was able to use their restroom without a blink by the doormen, but they would not let in a less groomed man. I also have been let past the velvet rope while men were left standing to wait another hour in the dead of winter. If an attractive woman is with a man or a group of men at that same velvet rope and she goes first, she and her party will get let it... and it never hurts to unbutton the second button on the sweater if there might be any doubt about the doorman.
So both exist, what you describe and the fact that women have incredible power over the men that rule the society because of their penis, and how it drains their IQ.
Some women know how to use that power and the really skilled ones retain it even when the face and body slouch slowly south. Jackie O was one of those people.
I never felt comfortable making the man pay, but there are plenty of women who feel a man should pay for most things because they have a greater earning power (whether or not they do earn more is a different story). If the woman makes more, there can be issues with a man -- he's either intimidated or uses it.
But this is speaking in generalizations. And the examples and paradoxes are endless. The ultimate goal in life is to find people to hang with and to be in love with who fit your world view, or at least your own mini-version of the world. And with those people you can construct a world within the bigger world, a fortress of consciousness that provides the grounding to deal with whatever comes when you're out 'there."
More paradox; In countries where in general the woman is a second class citizen, or in muslim countries, many have women "presidents". There are also countries like Sweden where nudity and sexuality is considered as natural as eating and many comparatively impoverished countries (liek Russian and some of the the "-stans" where more women hold revered jobs like doctors.
Everyu office and organization I've worked in, the women do all the real work. Then men meet, talk, travel, negotiate, but the women get the work done. They do not get the credit or the salary, though there are exceptions of course.
It's an age old deal. The fight for women's rights changed so much, and not some. Some things were easier when roles were defined, though perhaps not better. Rules and roles have always been confusing... Way back with Adam and Eve, who had the power? Eve. WHo got blamed for all original sin? Also Eve. Who came first? Adam? And where did Eve come from? His rib...? But she got him to take the bite... I'm as confused as you.
I guess one point I wanted to make is that men seem to have the power, and often do. But women are the achilles heel of men. I have never been very good at that, but I have seen women who are in action and it's very very interesting to see.
Remember that King -- what's his name of Windsor? He stepped down from the throne of England to pursue marrying a common divorcee -- it rocked the world only about 80 years ago. But he was happy. More power to him... and her.
Bottom line, as much as it sucks to be a girl, if you travel the world as well as look back in history, there are FAR FAR worse places and times to be a woman than the US in the 21st century. And that's a fact I give thanks for every single day.