Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Feminism

Although in general I would not consider myself “anti-feminist” (because I am for equal rights of women), I wouldn't choose to identify myself with the feminist movement either. I could go into the reasons, but I couldn't possibly write it better than one of my favorite bloggers, who did a series of brilliant posts about feminism, trying to understand it and sympathize with it, and sometimes feeling victimized by it. You're probably saying to yourself “Tl;dr” right now (Dear Grandma and Grandpa: Tl;dr is short for “too long; didn't read”) but I promise that if you even just start to scroll through the meditations, you'll end up reading all of them and your time will not be wasted:
First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Meditations on the subject of being a privileged white guy feeling terrorized by militant feminists, and other related topics.

If you really did skip over that section (no really! Read them!), I'll take a moment to summarize my negative feelings about feminism with a first analogy to race, which I believe to be an even more flagrant issue.

I am not racist if I refuse to give a black person something. Yes, I have been accused of this, and no, that is not acceptable. I am not racist if I acknowledge the fact that there are differences between races, such as Ashkenazim having long lifespans, or even (God forbid I attribute positive or negative attributes to races!) the fact that Chinese people are on average more intelligent than other races, second only to Ashkenazim. No, I am not racist if I acknowledge these differences, even if I mention that Ashkenazim have long lifespans and are the most intelligent ethnic group and I also happen to be half-Ashkenazi myself. Yes, I do believe that racism is an over-used word (a “superweapon,” if you read the blog I linked to above). Yes, I do acknowledge the fact that there is still racism in the world and that we should fight it, but accusing non-racist people of racism does not help your case.

The other problem I have with militant anti-racists is Affirmative Action, which deserves a whole post of his own and I wrote an essay on it last year that I got a bad grade on because my teacher was pro-affirmative action. (Grumble grumble bitterness bitterness.) But let's just leave it at this: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” --MLK Jr. This is what I want – I don't want it to be easier for blacks to get into Harvard than Asians, nor vice versa. I have read Tim Wise's “White Like Me” and didn't agree with most of it. It is true that blacks, on average, are disadvantaged in the race to success in college and jobs: growing up in poverty, with worse schools and a lower cultural value on education. But it is unfair and inaccurate to assume that all blacks are disadvantaged by an arbitrary 280 SAT points and that no whites or Asians are poor and disadvantaged. (To clarify, being black instead of Asian is as helpful as having scored 280 higher on the SAT in terms of getting admitted to college, on the old 1600 point scale. So you can picture it, that would be a 420 point difference on the new scale, for example, 2200 for an Asian and 1780 for a black.) This is why we have application essays: to get to know the person behind the application. But it is far too inaccurate to sort based on race, and it isn't fair to whites, blacks, or Asians to do so. (If you think it is to the advantage of African-Americans, keep in mind that affirmative action creates a different meaning of the phrase “Harvard diploma” for different races – since studies have shown that it is the type of student admitted to the top colleges and not the education provided by the top college that makes a successful graduate, if you admit a lower caliber of black people and a higher caliber of Asian people to Harvard, this will generate “Hey, this job applicant is a Harvard grad!” “Oh, this one too!” “...Well, the Asian Harvard graduate obviously had to be a more impressive candidate than the black one to get admitted, so we'll hire that one.” (Disclaimer: I do not know if this actually happens or not; it's just a theory. Let me know if you find any studies on it!)

This is approximately how I felt about feminism until rather recently.
(My brother read this post and said 'It sounds like you're saying "There's too little sexism to effect [sic] us anymore" and then immediately after that saying "Okay, well there could be enough to effect [sic] us somewhat, but not so much that it deserves to be made a big hairy deal of."' So just to clarify, yes, that's what this post is about, but with the emphasis being on how my views on the subject have evolved over time, partly thanks to the differences in treatment of women between the US and France.)

My thought process goes something like this:

I am aware that sexism was a huge problem in the past and still is a problem in many parts of the world for many people. But we have made so much progress against it that I have never felt denied an opportunity because of my sex. I have no reason to be feminist because I have never felt like my path to success is more difficult because I am female. The obvious challenges that still exist often have other reasons besides sexism behind them: There are many more male US senators than females, which is not because all men are misogynistic oppressive rapists, but because

  1. Men “look” more like senators, which is probably partly a social construct and partly a natural evolutionary urge since we look at men as the alpha wolves of the pack, and their natural height and brawn (to fight off the other potential pack leaders!) is clearly authoritative and a desirable trait in a leader. This is not necessarily a good thing, but I don't consider it a sexist thing either. It's an unfortunate, somewhat natural phenomenon.
  2. I don't have enough information about this to say anything, but it is true that there are natural differences in male and female brains. To choose a random example, the average male has better spatial skills than the average female. There might be biological, rather than societally-imposed (and therefore sexist) differences in our brains that account for highly skewed gender distribution in jobs such as politics, fashion, science research, etc.
  3. Sexism.

I promise you, I really do acknowledge that this is an issue. I just think we tend to exaggerate. And the last thing I want is a 50/50 female/male ratio in Congress. I want our politicians to be elected for their legal knowledge, their logical thinking, their effective policy-making, and their competence, regardless of sex, race, sexual orientation, or religion. I will still rejoice for the victory against prejudice when we succeed in electing a gay muslim athiest, but I won't vote for them if they aren't competent.

I still feel this way, but feminism is multi-faceted. There are certainly more issues than this, but most feminism I've encountered falls either into the discrimination-in-jobs category or the objectification-of-women category. The first category is the one I've discussed above, that I accept as an existing problem but don't get up in arms against because I've never personally experienced it. But the second one is one I've been thinking a lot more about lately.

Reason 1) I've already mentioned being intimidated by the fashionable French. Perhaps most of the US is just as fashionable as France, but I doubt it. My theory is that the Silicon Valley is particularly unfashionable because we value education above all else (and thus Harvard sweatshirt = fashionable, plus we don't give a damn), that the rest of the US is a little more fashionable than us, and that France is much more fashionable than the US in general. It is true that this holds true for the men as well as the women, but it's not equal. In the US the problem is that we're so homophobic that men could be afraid to dress nicely. Fitted khakis and shirt, a wool coat, a fashion scarf, and hair gel (completely normal in France) borders on metrosexual in the US. In the US, social pressure does not give men much choice, whereas women can dress like tomboys or femininely or however they want. In France, men can either dress nicely or in jeans and a sweatshirt (like the majority of American men) – they have free choice. It's the women in France who don't have a choice.

Before coming to France, I never would've imagined that (outside of TV shows about catty rich high school blondes) someone would actually say “Ew, look at what she's wearing!” in response to an ugly or unfashionable garment such as a T-shirt. Most people have heard “...well, that's an interesting fashion choice,” referring to a very short skirt or too many colors or very gothic or very cheerleader or any fashion choice that is deliberately extreme. To my social-o-meter, it is acceptable but not kind to comment negatively on deliberately extreme fashion choices, but not acceptable to call a person ugly (ever) or to call their garments ugly if they are simply plain. During the last 3 months, I've heard insults like that many times – not intended to be mean, but mean to my ears anyway. This is the sort of comment that people imagine others say of them but in my previous experience, no one ever says. In short, it's paranoia. But whereas I have never been too concerned with my appearance and rarely experienced such paranoia, now it's reality and not paranoia, as I realize I should be careful with how I dress so as not to put myself at a social disadvantage.

This, to me, smells awfully of objectification of women. Please let me know if there's another explanation that doesn't involve sexism (and that passes Occam's Razor), but that's what it sounds like to me. Remembering that I said in the US it's men who don't have a choice, let's acknowledge that that is a problem, too – not sexism, but closer to homophobia, in my opinion. But the lack of choice for women in France smells like sexism. We're obligated to look nice. Why would that be? I can't think of any other explanation besides the fact that a woman's role is to be decorative (aka a sex object, depending on how far you want to stretch the argument). They're all perfectly made-up. Clothes that I consider normal (T-shirts, sweatpants, sweatshirts) are not acceptable for girls to wear. Skirts and dresses and heels are much more common at Truffaut than at Homestead, and an amount of jewelry that would look skanky at Homestead is common at Truffaut. It's one of those things that in theory I don't support, but you can't fight a country and a culture. It's easier to conform and not make life harder for myself. (Don't worry; I still rebelliously wear my giant blue sweatshirt once every couple weeks or so just to remind myself that I'm American.)

Naturally, these girls don't think of it as an obligation. When I mentioned it to my BFF Julia, she seemed surprised. “It's just a habit!” But when she forgot to put on makeup one day a few weeks ago, she was desperate to find someone with an emergency makeup kit so she could fix the situation. That doesn't sound like a habit to me – it sounds like an obligation. And naturally there are girls who don't obey the rules. There will always be the nerds and the social outcasts who either haven't realized the rules exist (like many of my friends and family), don't have the confidence to give themselves a make-over and be like everyone else (once a late bloomer, always an awkward egg, just like me!), or just don't want to, strongly enough to overcome the societal pressure. But back home, at least at a high school full of nerds like Homestead, it was perfectly acceptable to choose whether or not to be fashionable. Fashionable people, like this cool fashion blogger from Homestead, aren't outcast for not being nerds (as far as I know; I have no personal data on this), and nerds are not ostracized for their sweatpants and Harvard sweatshirts. We are respected for our choices, and whatever we choose is generally not so unusual as to be remarkable. Here in France, it doesn't feel that way at all.

Reason 2 that feminism has become more of an issue for me since coming to France: I'm going to touch on this only briefly because I have little data on the matter, but French boys seem to be a lot pushier than American boys. You know that image we have of sexy, romantic Frenchmen who are slightly obsessed with chasing pretty girls but they're handsome so it's okay? Well, yeah, that. It's only charming in romantic comedies – in real life it doesn't fly. (Man, there are so many things wrong with romantic comedies... PLEASE don't think these are good stories to emulate!) Most of the American boys I knew were adorably shy with girls. This is clearly why the modern tie was invented by Anglo-Saxons: Anglo-Saxon girls need a handle for their men, or they'll never get kisses. This is not at all true for the typical French boy. Needless to say, I am a big believer in asking permission and respecting a negative answer as the final word – none of this “playing hard to get” nonsense. In Amurika, we teach our boys to respect womenfolk, or Pops'll shoot ya with his bear gun.

And last and least, Reason 3 is that my French teacher is a serious raging feminist. I do not always agree with her, but she does bring up some good points. My favorite one is this short video which is in French, but you'll get the gist even if you don't speak French. It swaps the gender roles of standard western society simply to shock you and realize that some things that we consider normal really shouldn't be. We shouldn't have to be afraid if we're walking down the street and there's a group of big strong guys leering at us. Granted, most guys are not rapists and would feel wounded if a woman was afraid to be alone in an elevator with him, for example. “I didn't do anything!” he would think, indignantly. And he would be right, most likely. And when a guy asks a girl out, sometimes she might be afraid as well. We don't know if it's just a guy asking us out, or if a refusal will be met with unwanted persistence and harassment. This, too, is unfair to the poor average guy who's just trying to get a date. I wish we could tell the difference, so we'd never say “Get away from me, creep!” to a nice guy who just wants to buy you a coffee, and we'd never accept a cup of coffee from a rapist. Unfortunately, men don't come with labels, and the fact that they are the physically stronger sex means that sometimes women will be afraid of innocent men, and sometimes women will trust men who will take advantage of them. Sure, women are mind-readers, but not infallibly.

...Shoot, I totally had other things to say, but then I got distracted and forgot what they were.




Okay, moving on. Here's my random PERSONAL UPDATES:

I GOT INTO UW-MADISON! :D If you'll remember from this post a super long time ago, my tour of Madison convinced me that that's where I wanted to go. I'm still going to wait for Berkeley to reject me before I say yes to Madison, but I'm pretty sure that's where I'm going. And I might end up rooming with one of my awesome Voyageur friends if she decides to go there as well! I'm getting pretty stoked for all of it – for living in Madison, which is a beautiful little city, and for the snowy cold, for living near the Boundary Waters and also my aunt and other assorted family and friends in Minneapolis, for getting to retake up band and all the musical opportunities I'm missing out on this year, for frisbee, for being gloriously undecided and getting to decide what I want to do with my life, for more study abroad, for making friends and Hoofers and sledding down Bascom Hill on cafeteria trays and getting to restart my life again, but this time in English and with a little more confidence.

On the other hand, I think I have to mention that last week I felt sad instead of excited for the first time at the thought of going home. My frisbee coach was talking about how we're going to play beach frisbee this summer and learn to run in the sand and how much fun diving for the disk is in beach frisbee. Then he asked me if I'd like to come help out with the mini Friday night practices for the younger kids he's going to set up next year, before remembering that I wouldn't be there. It really startled me, the feeling of wishing I'd be here to play beach frisbee and help out with the little ones. I'm having a good time, but normally I think of June with nothing but excitement.

In other news, we just got our grades for this trimester. I have an average of 15, which is equivalent to an A and is about the 4th highest in my class. It makes me feel half guilty, because I didn't do any work this trimester and I'm doing far better than I would've done at home with a full load of AP classes.
Just a note for any future exchange students reading this – I don't know why it works like this for me, but this is not a result you can expect. All the other American exchange students I know in France are not doing so well, and they don't get graded because if they were they'd get zeros. (And here is where Julia would tell me to shut up and stop being arrogant, but no, I'm just telling the truth.) The German students I met in Paris, on the other hand, they're right along with me, acing school. So I'm guessing it has something to do with good education (Homestead not being a typical US high school) and something to do with mastery of the language. I don't really know. But for whatever reason, exchange students either succeed or fail. They don't do anything in between. Just a heads-up.

All is going well. I have friends, at least, a few. School's fine, and now that first trimester grades are done, I'm essentially a second semester senior. I have another Ultimate tournament this weekend. And it's almost Christmas vacation, which means skiing at Méribel!

Here are your complimentary songs for the day. They're all good ones this time, too. (I've decided it looks much prettier to use hyperlinks instead of pasting youtube links all over the place. Maybe the perverse French obsession with things looking nice is getting to me.)

Tryo “Ce que l'on sème

Kyo “Dernière Danse

Patrick Bruel “Lequel de nous” (My host mom has a crush on Patrick Bruel! It's adorable.)


6 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Sure, but I'm not talking about beauty. (Furthermore, I don't think being well-dressed and made-up is the same thing as beauty.) I'm talking about the obligation for women to look nice, which makes women a decoration for the world and is demeaning.

      To clarify, if I want to not give a damn about my appearance, I should be able to make that choice without people being shocked and telling me I should change. Why should people assume that all women should be decorative? I didn't choose this! I would like to be appreciated for my brain and not have the appearance thing even be a question. For men, it isn't a question. An ugly successful businessman is never told he should try to be more beautiful.

      Delete
    2. Well I don't agree but I can sympathize with your perspective. I find that from a Darwinian frame of mind, people will be drawn to those who look healthy and genetically sound. And tall men make more money than short men, statistically speaking. I find that somewhat parallel. I am not shocked by your choice to aim for competence over beauty, but in the way we perceive beauty has not only societal but Darwinian roots. I don't know if you have netflix instant play in France, but if you search for the TED talks on Romance (I know right?) you will find a very interesting episode on the perception of beauty.

      Delete
    3. Wait, I have erred! It is in the fashion TED talks (ironically) I think it's the third episode. You can fish around a bit. It is one of the visual things where the lecturer talks and draws at the same time. You should check it out.

      Delete
  2. Alternate hypothesis from Alex:


    The objectification part seems to hold together, but here's my attempt at an alternate hypothesis: "intra-sex status battles can get pretty vicious, especially among females, so sometimes they'll take any excuse to come up with some requirement to hold each other to, and then they'll all keep following it even if it's completely arbitrary because it's better for their social status to follow the pack, so they can settle on hella random status signals that don't really reflect too much on anything else, and if they do, they'll stick with it."

    ReplyDelete
  3. The AP Gov textbook offers an explanation of the underrepresentation of women in Congress which is quite simple: Women are less likely to run for higher office (and also less likely to pursue CEO jobs) because of children. I don't remember exactly how the book worded it, but it was something along the lines of children-less women are just as likely to run for and win and election as a man, but children-ed women are significantly less likely to run for office. So this just goes into gender and family roles.

    ReplyDelete