Bumped from the Open Suggestion thread, so that we can have a general discussion about the various issues surrounding how choices can be constrained by socialised expectations:
lala, on June 15th, 2008 at 1:53 am Said
I’m an engineer and pretty much always the only woman (or occasionally, one of two women) in any workplace setting. I also frequent communities that revolve around technical subjects both online and off.
Now whenever I, or another woman, or even another man starts talking about encouraging other women to join in technical subjects, people seem to get very hostile.
Some of them will say that women don’t have the brains for it, but then claim that they aren’t being sexist because they love admire women’s natural abilities to nurture and manage social settings so that everyone is happy. I have science to throw at those people, so I can deal with them.
However, many will take the attitude that women aren’t /choosing/ to participate in technical subjects and therefore we should leave that alone. Women don’t want it, so why don’t we leave that alone? What’s the problem?
I myself used to be a woman who identified myself as “feminine” and things like computers were simply incompatible with my identity. I was damn miserable then, even suicidal, and I can’t express how amazing it was when I discovered I could throw off that restriction and actually live a life for myself.It’s also really annoying that they are creating a hostile environment for women, but at the very same time as arguing that there is nothing but a lack of personal interest that is keeping women from entering the environment.
[snip]
lala, on June 15th, 2008 at 2:04 am Said:
Actually, I just thought about this for a minute more and realized something (sorry for the double post). The attitude that I just complained about above seems to be one of the biggest reasons for the rejection of feminism. I think it’s one of the main reasons that the mainstream belief is that feminism is obsolete. Women are now /legally/ allowed to do everything men are, and therefore any difference between men’s positions in life and women’s positions in life must be because women chose for it to be that way. And feminists are just trying to control women and tell them what to do against their will.
Now I really, really would like you to address it.
P.S. I just saw a similar display of this problem on a forum. A woman said that she had asked the manager of a store to change a sign that said “Boy’s toys” to just “Toys.” The forum filled up full of abuse that she was being a “politically correct dictator” and insistence that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that sign because little girls themselves are the ones who choose not to play with trucks and action figures.
People seem to think that when a feminist objects to things like this it is solely because they are personally offended. The social conditioning that feminists wish to remove is not taken into consideration.
As a couple of people have already noted in comments, this is a great topic suggestion. This is huge. So please share your thoughts and any great links you have bookmarked addressing the thorny issue of choices and how they are constrained and how they may be criticised.
Filed under: clarifying-concepts, gender, gender gap, self-sovereignty | Tagged: attitude, blog, brains, choices, engineer, feminine, feminism, general discussion, hostile environment, natural abilities, nothing but a lack, personal interest, rejection, restriction, science, social settings, suggestion, technical subjects, two women
@ Renee
Hi, and thanks!
I see what you mean, but does the same apply if the sexism isn’t being directed at other people?
Umm, your ‘colluders’ sound like a good example – if they are inflicting their sexist values on other people then absolutely it would be right to stand up against this, and I would hope I would do what I can about it. But if they’re just choosing to live their life according to these values I’m not sure I have any right to say anything? I think this might be particularly sensitive because being of the male persuasion, I really wouldn’t want to go around telling women how women should behave, especially in the name of feminism.
Equally with male friends, although I’m having a harder time putting that into words, so I’ll leave that out for now.
Hugh.
Well, Hugh, sexism and any other form of discrimination hurts actual people, you have to decide what you consider more important, ‘not inflicting’ your opinion on other people, or letting people being hurt (keep in mind you are in a position of power regarding the discriminated people).
But you are right, the situation with women is more complicated since you are in a more privileged position than then. Since they are the ones suffering the sexism, and not you, maybe it would be better if you listen to them and their objections. But that isn’t the case with your male friends.
“So my roommate decided to give me an example from the movie “Mona Lisa Smile” saying that a character in the movie chose to be a housewife. ”
Oh, god, that’s just….
Crap arguments that rely on anecdotes as “proof” are annoying enough. Crap arguments that rely on censored or fictionalized anecdotes as “proof” are, like, a thousand times even more annoying.
But what’s even more annoying than that? Bad interpretations of fictionalized anecdotes.
(For those of you that haven’t seen the movie or missed this…) There was obviously a huge chunk cut from the movie, and I’m suspecting it was where Julia Stiles’ character agonized over whether or not to have an abortion. What with it being 1950 and abortion being both illegal and dangerous.
Even without that, it’s still fairly clear that Stiles’ character isn’t saying that she doesn’t want a life outside her husband’s, but that, given the choice between being his wife and having a career, she chooses him. Which is so very not the same thing as “choosing to be a housewife.” That’s what her friend (Kirsten Dunst) choose, and that did not work out well.
Thanks Noir. And ah, I see what you mean. But I’m still struggling to see what you *can* do?
If someone(I was thinking a woman initially, but I suppost this works equally well with a man) believes that the only proper role for women is to be deferential and housewifely, granted it’s because they’ve been constantly surrounded by patriarchal values all their life, but what is there you can say to that?
Since it’s a value judgement, you can’t say it’s factually inaccurate, you can’t prove them wrong. You can say it’s harmful to women, but again there’s a value judgement involved – presumably their idea of what constitutes “good” for women is very different from yours.
Of course if they’re saying women *must* be like this, it’s a different situation, but otherwise I’m having trouble finding anything to say other than “Well, that’s not my opinion”?
And thanks for your help, folks!
Hugh.
I’m a scientist and have had so much trouble with people from the maintenance department. They are very lax about making sure the ventilation is correct in my lab and keeping the humidity proper for the equipment. Someone heard one of them bragging that he was turing off ventilation to my lab to see if i would notice. If people want to be homemakers or whatever that is fine with me. They should make sure they get a 401K set up though because they might end up like my sister, having their husband tell them that they are no longer attractive so he is leaving her on her 50th birthday. But I can’t do my job when people around me hate me for who I am because I am not a doormat.
Hugh, the problem is that sexism isn’t a matter of values, is a system that oppress women and doesn’t let them be full human beings. And it’s perpetrated and perpetuated by people. Those biases that you call ‘values’ are what constitute our sexist society.
So when someone says that ‘women are just made to be housewives,’ they will instill that to their children, or anyone who they have influence to. That’s how they will educate their daughters, that’s how they will judge women (they judge the women who work under them, who are their colleagues, or their students). I don’t have to explain how much it hurts women to have their possibilities limited, and to have to adjust to a sexist-society’s standards.
What we can do to fight this is challenge those biases and promote better options for women. Of course you can’t change someone way of thinking if they aren’t open to hear you, but you can at leas try to to show them how their visions aren’t reasonable, or hurt people.
And by the way, totally related with this thread, look at this post about ‘the difference in aptitudes between genders’ on the now very-infamous blog (known for its sexism) of Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/glory-vs-relati.html#comments (Can I link this? Just delete this if it was wrong.)
And look at the comments:
That’s hard science. You know, I’m doing a biochemistry major, which is a science, and a very not-empathetical one. And yet, 90% of my classmates, and colleagues are women. Over here it’s a pretty ‘womanly’ field.
No, sexism, of course it’s not the cause for the lack of women in some areas.
Aren’t we amazingly privileged? I wonder why women aren’t showing so much interest in those fields which very inclusive colleagues. Really.
Why women are in worse paid jobs, and men don’t want to do them? Huh. Genes and hormones, I’m sure.
Those are pretty little interesting bias, aren’t they? I seriously wanted to hit something reading that blog.
Ah, that makes a lot of sense – thanks for your help!
Hugh.
Sexism has also affected me a lot in my childhood.A few of the scars left by it I`m only getting rid of now.But it changed me in a different way them in you girls,instead of being ashamed by not liking girlie things,as the explanation I received for HAVING to be the way they told me to was that this was how God wanted and that this was how I was supposed to be,I actually became skeptical and despized all of the things of the soul,thinking they were as nonsense as what people told me about them;just so I`d be free to be who I am.
Like Beppie said. Sure, women can do those things, but they’re constantly told either overtly or subliminally that if you do those things, you’re not being feminine, it makes you less of a woman, put that how you like. I was once asked what I wanted to do for a living, I replied, I want to be a death metal singer. I was told ‘you’d need to take male hormones to be able to do that.’ Yeah, why not just shit all over me and my aspirations. Don’t even consider the fact that anyone can learn to sing like that, because it’s too much for your everyman’s brain to handle.
[...] Here, at the Feminism 101 blog. Below is an excerpt from the first comment: I think it’s pretty clear that most people– including strong, intelligent people– tend to prefer certain choices if they are positively reinforced by society. It’s not just a choice between being an engineer and being a childcare worker, or between shaving your legs or not, it’s a choice between “Do I want people to treat me positively or negatively?” knowing that working in a male dominated environment, or adhering to non-normative beauty standards will reveal many layers of misogyny that are normally kept hidden (note: I’m not saying that misogyny is any less prevalent in any of these environments, just that it often comes into sharper focus when you go against the grain, and that is difficult to deal with). [...]
Maybe it’s minor compared to the career and pay issues everyone’s been talking about here, but I want to say “what Beppie said in the first comment.”
I’m a straight dude in a relationship with a wonderful, brilliant, accomplished, feminist woman. (I had to pause after typing that. She really is wonderful.) Anyway, it’s summer, people wear shorts, and my gf “has” to… shave her legs.
It pisses her off.
It pisses me off.
We talked about this a few times, and it comes down to: yeah, it’s sexist as anything, of course she can choose to let a little fuzzy light brown hair grow where it naturally does, it looks perfectly fine, and… she is just sick and tired of the stares and dirty looks and the odd comment every now and then.
Sure it’s a choice. But people in this part of the world have a really intense patriarchal aversion to visible hair on the legs of women. And that’s what this is about.
I think it’s possible to take an extreme position (not that anyone here has done so) that freedom means making every single daily choice in a vacuum, that being influenced by society in any way is inherently oppressive, and so on. I don’t buy that (hypothetical) argument.
But I totally get what Tigtog is saying about choices. Even in little things, there is this great big patriarchal thumb on the scales.
Some related awesomeness (read the whole thing):
“Feminism is rebellion against the powerful, resistance against passivity, and a call to action to overturn the comfortable way the world is run—-for men and some comfortable women. In a sexist society, there is no way to avoid sexism. Therefore, feminism requires that you analyze every thing and make conscious choices. Feminism isn’t about telling women what to do; it’s about letting them know that all the things they’ve been denied are possible. ”
http://ginmar.livejournal.com/2007/04/30/
Um, hi!
I’d first like to say how much I have enjoyed reading so far through this blog and these comments. It helps bring light to the issue, but also helps me put to words what I’ve seen and thought of.
Well, about society’s pressure as a child, this, preconditioning to your gender role, since I’m coming from it quite recently (I’m 16), I do see a lot of lipservice to “You can be whatever you want!” but praising girls who choose nurturing, or caring, or toned down careers. It’s why sometimes it’s difficult talking about a possible career in Biology with people who want to know what I want to study. Most people start spouting medical colleges, assuming that is what I meant, (When no, when I mean Biology I mean Genetics! Biological Behaviorism! and others), and when I clarify, smile and stay quiet for a bit, as if reassessing me. It’s really annoying, and it’s tough, but I don’t want to ask them why they assumed medicine, mostly because these people are my parent’s coworkers, or well meaning people. I find it much easier to denounce sexism in my peer group, even if then I don’t (There is slightly more sexism in Latin America).
Oh, I lost all structure I wanted in my comment, but the basic idea is that, I think these expectations shape girls like me to different careers, simply because our options aren’t fully expressed, as most people think we’ll veer in the traditional direction. Which starts a type of vicious circle of fulfilling expectations.
There’s a lot of good comments here. I especially agree with Noir about the pervasiveness of the patriarchal society we live in, and how that shapes and precludes the choices that girls/women make.
Women have been trying to right the wrongs done to them for 100’s, even 1000’s of years. They probably came the closest to overthrowing patriarchy in the early part of the 20th century, and if World War I hadn’t intervened, they may have succeeded. Men were scared, really scared. As they should be (and are).
Women will have an excellent chance of restoring some balance, getting their rightful position back, in the upcoming upheaval–the disasters brought on by global warming, which of course has happened on men’s watch–in fact their swashbuckle romp through history (called “civilization” ) is what brought on this catastrophe. Naturally their response is typical men-stuff: Denial and refusal to take it seriously.
Growing up, I was constantly mocked for not fitting in with the status quo. If I did something considered unmanly or showed a genuine interest in a school subject, I would be mocked, by both boys and girls. For girls, I believe the situation is even more difficult, and the lines much easier to cross. The discussion as to exactly why may lead to the argument of true gender differences, parental influence and gender status quo, but therein lies the proof. Even if we assume that it’s inherently genetic for women to be image conscious and disparaging of ‘technical’ studies, that influence is external to any desire to study those subjects. Therefore, the number of women who had a strong potential interest in a technical field is larger than the number of women who follow that interest in the face of social pressure. That is to say, a lot of these women are coerced out of their choice. To me, that is plainly worth fighting for, even to those who scoff at a more gender neutral parenting.
thnk t s fn trtng wmn s sx bjcts. nd thnk mn wmn lk bng trtd s sx bjcts. Fmnsts jst wnt t rn vrybd’s fn jst bcs th hv n nfrrt cmplx
[comment text disemvowelled, name-field changed and avatar-tagged by moderator]
I learned so many interesting and exciting things about myself once I realized how cultural conditioning (i.e., patriarchal conditioning) has colored my thinking and influenced every decision I’ve made since I first began to assert my individuality (a hugely ironic term when considered within the framework of any society, now that I come to think about it). I am far less “girly” than I thought I was. The “tomboy” who traded her matchbox cars and tree-climbing days for social acceptance among peers and disapproving elders is resurfacing now, and, ah!, I am so very happy to see her dirt-speckled grinning face once more.
When I look back and examine the amount of cultural conditioning I was subjected to, I think I got off easy in a lot of ways.
I never felt penalized for having interests that are not traditionally female until I was nearly 25 years old (and my mother did a 360 and started badgering me to find a husband, oy). As a child I was not interested in dolls or makeup or clothes or jewellery as playthings. But I had no interest in my brother’s dump trucks and laser guns and action figures. I preferred gender neutral toys such as Play-Doh, Lego, books, Lite-Brite, etc. and I never had a second thought about it. I remember when I was a kid, people would give me dolls as gifts and my parents would re-gift the dolls away without a fuss. And I suppose it helped that my background is East Indian; by the time I was eight my parents started drilling into my head that I should become a doctor and that I had to do well in hard science.
Right, and African Americans CHOOSE to have higher poverty and violent crime rates in their communities. Because poverty and violence and drug abuse are just sooo much fun.
I’ve had to think hard in the last couple of years about “choices” I made as a teenager. My group of friends told ourselves and others that we were into corsets and miniskirts because they were cool and unique. Can’t speak for the friends, but I for one realize now that I was actually into them because I had low body self-esteem and assumed that if I couldn’t be sexy in the same way as everyone else, I’d have to do it in an outrageous, theatrical way, because bottom line, I had to be sexy. Why I had to be sexy, though, I wouldn’t have been able to tell you.
Even though I finally feel confident picking my outfits for comfort rather than sexiness, there are some days when I want to go out and decide to dress up in stockings or a minidress or a halter top, because feeling sexy is comforting. But I also realize that it’s only comforting because I’m living in a patriarchy, and the proper state of being, for which we are rewarded, is sexiness. You could be aware as all hell and it’ll always be there, hovering over you, affecting your choices.
The Boys’ Toys thing triggered a flashback to my own awakening as a male feminist. While I’d long done a bit of passive lip-service to the ideals of a non-discriminatory society, I hadn’t grokked the concept of privilege.
I was on a date; we went to see Mulan. I was pleased; while there was, of course, a bit of stereotyping of both women and Asians, it was still a far leap forward from Disney’s “Princess Era”, and I could feel fairly glad about that.
Then… we stopped off at the mall. And walked into the Disney Store.
The movie had just come out, so of course they were piled high with Mulan merchandise. And on shelf after shelf, what was the doll that Disney’s merchandisers felt best exemplified this movie about a woman in a man’s world?
Bridal &$&#*( Mulan. Not Kung Fu Mulan. Not Tactical Genius Mulan. Not Bo Stick Action Mulan. No. It’s Mulan all painted and wrapped in a dress so tight every step has to be more of a mince forward and….
Meanwhile, there was a costume for little boys who wanted to dress up like a warrior from China.
I ranted. In public. For a full 15 minutes. The thought that these corporate scum were daring to push this crap on my nieces as the feminine ideal (my eldest niece would later go on to do tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, and could probably kick my over-large butt without breaking a sweat) just made me completely enraged.
I was still years from even hearing the actual word “privilege” as it pertains to feminism and racism, but at least I finally had some insight into the concept.
god knows how many posts and discussions I have read concerning this topic. all i can say it’s because of the victory of culture over nature.
no one is born a man or woman(except biologically). we become men and women. Kind of what Simone de Beavoir says.
[...] “Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog!” we have “You feminists just want to tell women to do what you want, instead of letting them CHOOSE (an… with a great comments thread that sort of ties in with my earlier post, in that it’s about [...]