02.18.08
How sexism works
I’ve seen this cartoon in a few places today, but it is very true, and worth a few thoughts.
(feministing.com’s headline for this was brilliant, “Boys suck at logic, non-sexism.”Sexism turn attributes of people into attributes of gender. Senator Clinton (I refuse to call her the demeaning “Hillary” as if she were Britney or someone) becomes a poor candidate because she seems like a “bitch” or her expression of emotions are read as “weak” or “manipulative”; if done by a male candidate they would have been read as “caring” (remember Bill Clinton?). Further, the authenticity of her tears was questioned since she, of course, comes off like a cold, hard, bitch.
See a bad driver? When it’s a woman, the comment is often made, “women are such bad drivers.” If the driver is a male do we then say “men are such bad drivers”? Does anyone really keep a tally of the quality of drivers by gender vs. the proportion of the driving population they consist of? And really, does one person’s set of observations really produce a truth?
No it doesn’t-but experiential “evidence” like this is meant to reinforce what we already think about particular identity groups. In the philosophical arena, “direction of fit” is when what we think about the world fits the facts of the world. In the feminist critique of epistemology, we see that this idea doesn’t really happen, because the facts we recognize are those that reinforce what we already think about the world-we see in the world that which confirms what we already believe, and the mere observation of it in the world serves as “proof” of the truth of said belief. Think about it: it is so much easier for people to believe a “scientific study” that confirms “common sense” than one that defies it.
But science has been used for centuries to reinforce ideological views about the inferiority of races (non-white), ethnicities (non-Euro), gender (non-male), and sexualities (non-heteronormative), using their “facts” as “proof” of their discrimination and oppression. Much of the “old” science has been refuted, although many of their claims persist as “common sense.” Indeed, sexist and racist views continue to be circulated in contemporary scientific studies.
Let’s go back to the driving example-all this is to say, have you ever considered that in our society, despite what we think is our “gender equality,” and regardless of whether she holds a paying job (versus the unpaid work of mothering), women disproportionately bear the burden of child-raising and rearing? Thus, if you do happen to notice that women drivers seem to be “bad,” did you ever look to see if there were kids in the car, screaming for her attention? Did you ever think she was trying to make doctor’s appointments and decide what to make for dinner while she’s driving from work to pick the kids up from the sitter’s? IF, and that’s a big IF, women are “worse” drivers, could it actually be because of the prevalence of sexism that causes these things and not because of the “fact” of them being female? This just adds sexism to sexism. Perhaps it is better said that “people with young kids in the car are bad drivers.”
This is the same thing that happens in the math example. IF indeed boys score higher than girls on math exams, it is wrong wrong wrong to say that because we are “gender-equal,” (and that’s up for debate in my book) that means boys are better than girls at math. Don’t blame girls for continued gender discrimination in the classroom, from parents, hell, in the McDonald’s happy meals, where the kinds of play and developments tools we give to kids will highly inform their capacities for certain academic subjects. Of, if a person’s not good at math, maybe they’re just not good at math. Blaming it on their gender is just as logical as blaming it on their eye color.
I think the appropriate saying here is, “you find what you’re looking for.”
And that’s sexism for ya.
02.17.08
Randon Act of Feminism for February/March : Gendered-Language Watch
I’ve decided to start a monthly “Random Act of Feminism”- a suggestion of something you can do to make feminism or feminist thinking visible in daily interactions with others. Among all of this cultural analysis, feminism is both useful and relevant to everyday life!
We’re halfway through February, so this will be a 2-month deal, which is actually pretty appropriate considering February and March are the token “appreciation” months for women and African-Americans. Which in my book pretty much boils down to this:
image credit: Guerilla GirlsBut this Random Act regards women and people of color (in addition to other social minorities) specifically, so in a way, I suppose it’s “appropriate.”**
Without further adieu….
Gendered-language watch
In conversation (your own and others’), watch how people are described. Typically, we use “identity” descriptors only with reference to women, gay men, lesbians, people of color, non-Western ethnicities, (and also non-Christian religions)…in other words, the default category for a “person” is a white, hetero, male. A person is only someone “other” than that when specified.
This is what’s referred to as “ex-nomination” (coined by the semiotician Roland Bathes)-being ‘unnamed’. What is unnamed is what is seen as a ‘natural’ commonsensical category. Those of us who are not white heterosexual men become those with “marked bodies”-bodies who must be named to be identified. In other words, people who are women, or black are designated as such (as if identifying them according to said label adds particular meaning to who they are as a person), while white hetero men are simply “people,” and are thus permitted to establish meaningful identities in ways not shaped by said societal identity labels.
Listen for it-you’ll be surprised. Start correcting your own speech and kindly point it out in others’. Usually these identity markers are completely irrelevant to the context of what’s being said-and using them continues to produce the default category of “person” or “human” in line with how it’s been posited throughout history, and how it’s been assumed to be in disciplines such as science, psychology, and philosophy: white, heterosexual, and male. This is a subtle way that norms around gender, sexuality, race, class, &,… are reproduced on a daily basis, through interpersonal interaction. “-isms” (sexism, racism…) need not come in the form of legal discrimination-they often happen in little moments throughout the day in ways we often don’t realize…until someone says “hey, wait a sec…”
**These token “history” months are case-in-point. I do not wish to take away from their usefulness-during those months, the promotion of minoritarian history seems like worthwhile endeavors and more people are exposed to those histories than might otherwise be. Indeed, it is sad that traditional disciplines are so WHITE that they are even necessary. But, they are a good example of what I’m talking about as far as exnomination goes. I hear so many people say, “Well, when will we have a men’s history month?” The simple (and to me, obvious) answer: every day of every month of every year, in newspapers and classrooms nationwide, is the teaching of men’s history. It just isn’t called that. “Neutral” history is really the history of dominant culture-it just gets the “privilege” of being called plain-old “history”. Why? Oh yeah-because of exnomination, baby!
02.15.08
Msn.com/hotmail.com reiterations of gender stereotypes #1
From the intro:
- More than anything else, sexy is a state of mind, and it starts with you! It’s a feeling that’s all about being warm, inviting and approachable, while maintaining a little bit of mystery. But most importantly, it’s about being confident and comfortable in your skin, and your clothing. So put the idea of the “bombshell” aside, ladies. There are plenty of understated ways for you to feel flirty every day.
So on the positive side, being sexy is about being confident in and comfortable with yourself-this is a good thing! But we also find out that this is something the “ladies” should be concerned with. Hmmm, not so good.
So what are some suggestions toward feeling comfortable and confident in yourself? Well, performing for a male spectator of course, but performing while looking like it’s effortless!
- …your most intimate layers and mini makeup tricks will work wonders toward altering your attitude. Hot hosiery and sexy shapewear are items that are meant to make you feel feminine and fierce — and also excite your guy! Hints of red on your nails or lips are likely to stir up flirtatious feelings…And finally, perfume peaks the sense of smell and makes an invisible seductive statement that will linger in a man’s memory.
Geez, this doesn’t sound like being “comfortable in your own skin”, it’s more like creating a “skin “that has been culturally-approved as sexy so that you can then feel comfortable! Here we also find out who the real target of “sexiness” is-it’s about exciting your guy! It’s all for someone else, not about being confident…unless such confidence is coming from conforming to the social/sexist dictates of female sexiness. Here is also where the heterosexist bias of the article comes in-because no woman who wants to be sexy could possibly be sexually interested in a woman!
- …disarm yourself by dressing in light, delicate colors such as blush and cream. Slip on sensuous-feeling fabrics such as cashmere and silk that conjure up images of cuddling and caressing — something that says sexy in a subtle way! Sheer peek-a-boo effects with a sleeve or thin overlay, and feminine details such as a flirty slip exposed at the hemline, hint at something to be explored later on.
To be sexy, a woman must be feminine-delicate, soft, an object of sexual desire (rather than the active pursuant of it). Yawn.
- The girl next door is a classic symbol of sex appeal, and this look is easy to accomplish!…from a guy’s perspective, casual cute clothing equals adorable and approachable. After all, who isn’t drawn to someone who appears to be fun and easygoing!
Nope-women can’t be too serious you know! And I love how in this “tip” she uses celebrities to make her point-Cameron Diaz, Jennifer Aniston-which I guess just reinforces that being sexy is about a “look”-how she looks to others- and not at all about how a woman herself feels, as the intro so misleadingly claims. And I love here too that it’s not important to be fun and easy going, just look that way by dressing cas.
- Stand out in a crowd with a pop color, and consider a saucy wrap dress, which will show off your most womanly asset — curves…According to a beauty book she [Sophia Loren] wrote back in 1984, colorful jewelry can enhance your allure, but attitude and charm can make anybody beautiful. My two cents…: Don’t forget about a deliciously fun pair of heels! My favorites, to this day, are a pair of pink round-toe slingbacks with red suede roses on the toes. They just make me happy every time I look down. Fabulous accents like these will not only make you happy, but believe me, he will notice!
So here we are reminded that our most feminine asset is our “curves”-clearly not our attitude, intelligence, wit….all things that in addition to good fashion sense could create the confidence and comfort about oneself this article led me to believe (ok now I’m just being silly) that sexiness was! And of course heels are of utmost importance-they are sexy because of how they engage leg muscles and therefore emphasize leg tone, but are notoriously uncomfortable and very bad for your ankles and toes. And not only will you be sexy, but happy! And-HE will notice! The best part is how the Loren quote contradicts this entire article!
After each “tip” are shopping examples for the tip being offered. I mean, to be sexy I absolutely should run out and buy the “Ivory bell-sleeve cashmere sweater, $220; Cream slip dress, $389.” I think now we see why sexiness can’t possibly be about self-confidence that is produced by developing your emotional, intellectual, sexual and physical health…there isn’t a commodity to sell! A profit can’t be made over and over again as female sexiness is continually slightly modified to continually sell products!
Clearly we have the contradictory message that sexiness comes from confidence, but confidence comes from performing classical femininity wrapped up in commodity consumption, all for the (assumed) male viewer (and male CEO!). This pop-advice article reiterates gender stereotypes and heterosexism-apparently, men don’t need to or don’t care to be sexy, and neither do lesbian and bisexual women.
02.03.08
Gender Stereotypes and Male Feminists
The f-word has a provocative article (written by a man!) about the way gender stereotypes hurt men, why men tend to not fight them the way women through feminism have, and what we should do about it!
First, an excerpt:
Let’s not kid ourselves here: men as well as women are limited by gender stereotypes. The idea of men as stupid and sex-obsessed is an enduring generalisation that is allowed to flourish in – dare I say it – a much more brazen way than the stereotypes about women, mainly because no man ever stands up and says: “Hey, that’s sexist and it offends me!” The problem is, while women are encouraged to reject the ludicrous ideas that are held about them, men are supposed to embrace them….
…From an early age, women are aware of their gender and what it means for their lives, far more than men are. Feminism encourages women to shed gender stereotypes and consider themselves as individuals. Men simply don’t think about gender. Why would you, when it rarely impacts in a noticeable way on your life? Very rarely is your progress barred because you are a man and it is true that male culture generally does not promote frank and open discussion of such issues.
Many men aren’t feminists simply because it has never occurred to them that they should be: when you’re not faced every day with the challenges thrown up by gender inequality it is very easy to think: “Well, we’ve changed the law so we have equality now.”
And I’d add to his analysis, that often times the gender stereotypes perpetuated for men have the effect of reiterating homophobia and misogyny-so on the one hand, men see little need to challenge them since they don’t seem to directly affect their lives, but also they tend to reinforce their dominant position in society (by labeling the “non-manly” as “gay”, by using overactive sex drive to justify sexism and objectification…)
In order to combat these stereotypes, gender analysis (feminism!) absolutely has to be embraced. This is not only to prove them false by demonstrating they do not accurately reflect the diversity of men’s lives, but also to provide discursive analysis to understand how these stereotypes produce masculinity in particular ways: in much the same way that, for example, feminist analysis showed that the stereotype that women are not as good at math and science as men guided teachers and parents to steer girls away from those subjects at both school and home, after which few women would enter those fields, providing the empirical fact that women do not so well in math and science because few women in fact do work in those fields.
What this example (and many others!) shows is that even if stereotypes do reflect a significant portion of a population, that does not make their manifestation “natural.” It is important to look at how masculinities and femininities are produced as such. And as I allude to above, there is much analysis done already that looks at the sexism and homophobia that produces masculinity in particular ways. So if we want masculinities that are rich and varied, and if we want to combat homophobia and misogyny, men need to embrace gender analysis, feminism, and begin to critique these stereotypes on a regular basis in their daily lives the way feminism has been for decades.
May I recommend…
Books:
Men Doing Feminism
Men in Feminism
The Making of Anti-Sexist Men
Masculinities
Click here to subscribe in a reader
