Tag Archives: equality

“Trashing” and How We Haven’t Learned Much Since ’76

Did you read the obituary of Shulasmith Firestone by Susan Faludi last week? Did you cry? Yeah… me neither. Sniff, sniff. I was struck by how little seems to have changed; we still beat each other up over what is and isn’t feminist or feminist enough. Even within the ranks there’s a lot of disagreement and finger pointing and us vs. them and right way/wrong way, my way/highway chest beating. Firestone was slayed by this kind of criticism and it ultimately led to her isolation from the movement and contributed to the tragedy of her lonely death.

This week for Role/Reboot I was inspired by the Jo Freeman 1976 essay about “trashing” that Faludi referenced in the Firestone obituary. It just rang so familiar, echoing much of the Sandberg/Mayer controversies of the last few months. You’d think we would have gotten better about this by now…

Screenshot_4_15_13_1_50_PMRelated Post: On raunch humor and feminism

Related Post: Carrie, Kelly, Taylor, the week in feminism

1 Comment

Filed under Gender, Republished!

Monday Scraps 95

sunday96

1. DATING: Where do “missed connections” happen? In Illinois, on the train (duh), in Indiana, at home. Wait, what?

2. AUTHORS: Ugh. Ender’s Game was kind of my favorite thing for so so long. It still is, but I hate when the authors you love turn out to be raging homophobes. Dammit.

3. EDUCATION: This amazing investigative piece by WBEZ on the South Side’s Harper High School is incredible in basically every way journalism can be incredible.

4. KNOPE: NYMag has the inside scoop behind Amy Poehler/Leslie Knope’s amazing wedding dress.

5. SPORTS: For the very first time, a woman is participating in the NFL regional tryouts. Kicker Lauren Silberman will probably not play in the NFL, but that’s still pretty f’ing cool.

6. OSCARS: I would write about Seth McFarlane’s horribly sexist jokes, but Margaret Lyons at NYMag  nailed it so hard I’d just be paraphrasing. 

Related Post: Sunday Scraps 94: Bey, Connie Britton, Jane Austen and more.

Related Post: Sunday Scraps: 93: Guns, visiting Chicago, Margaret Atwood

3 Comments

Filed under Books, Chicago, Education, Gender, Hollywood, Media, Politics, Sports

I Think I’m Doing OkCupid Wrong

This week for Role/Reboot, I did a little internal investigation on how I behave on online dating sites. We already know how I feel about gendered traditions once we’re actually on the date (i.e. Who pays?), but what about the sending of and responding to messages? Why do I sit back and wait? Is the answer really because it’s just so freaking easy? That seems like laziness to me, and no one should rest on their laurels when it comes to equalizing the playing field, least of all ladies who write about gender and equality on the internet…

onlinedatingRelated Post: Comparing dating to church.

Related Post: Guest post: the dangers of dating while freelancing

2 Comments

Filed under Gender, Republished!

Thoughts on Bling

A week ago, I would not have told you that I had any sort of strong feelings about engagement rings. I generally think super expensive, super ostentatious stuff is overrated, but that’s a ship that has sailed on the wedding industrial complex.

Then, through a series of conversations with friends, a lot of internet reading, and a handful of texts with my mom, I realized that the engagement ring tradition is actually one I want no part of. Here’s why:

Related Post: So what does a wedding photographer do exactly?

Related Post: Surprisingly pleased with the Grey’s Anatomy take on marriage…

1 Comment

Filed under Gender, Republished!

Things that are not the opposite of misogyny

Remember when I wrote about Newsroom? This is what I was trying to say:

“And yet semi-hallowed reverence for women is not actually the opposite of misogyny. The feminist utopia version of Newsroom isn’t the one where the female characters are Perfect and Powerful. It’s a version where the female characters aren’t completely othered at every moment; where their motivations make as much sense as male characters’; where they’re given the same opportunities to be perfect and imperfect, powerful and disempowered, as right, wrong, scared, and brave as their male counterparts.”

That’s Margaret Lyons at New York Mag and I could kiss her right now.

Much like racists protest their racism by pointing vaguely at their black friends, and Sarah Palin protests calls of bigotry by waving at her gay hairstylist, misogynists have created all sorts of misguided diversions to distract from their misogyny. Let’s take a look:

1. Protectionism: This ancient strategy involves demonstrating your “respect” for women by protecting their delicate sensibilities from the less pink and sparkly parts of life. Ladies might not understand how sad they’ll be after an abortion, so we should make this decision for them! Women don’t understand biology, so we must push an ultrasound in front of their faces!

Why this is dangerous: A central tenet of equality is the belief in the autonomy and decision-making power of adults. The perception that women possess lesser powers of discernment and need “coaching” to understand complex concepts is insulting and belittling.

2. Pedestal-ism: I made up this word, but I think it accurately describes the notion that women exist to be admired instead of included. Anybody who refers to keeping women “pure,” “innocent,” “ladylike,” etc. is a proponent of pedestalism. Anyone who insists that the maintainance of beauty standards is essential to “womanhood” is invested in perpetuating the role of women as objects of adoration.

Why this is dangerous: Pedestalism is about restricting the female sphere of influence and ensuring that women waste their time pursuing physical admiration instead of learning, communicating, growing, evolving, and being rock stars.

3. Chivalry: I’m not talking about opening a car door (though honestly, good rule of thumb: be nice to people and help each other out. Duh.) Being a provider is not the same as being a partner. Paying the bills or picking up dinner doesn’t make you not a misogynist. Recognizing women as equal partners in social engagements, relationships, the workplace and the home is what makes you not a misogynist.

Why this is dangerous: Chivalry creates patterns of entitlement and transaction in social engagements based on gender. Kindness and generosity, however, create goodwill and reciprocity between peers.

4. Separate but Equalism: Acknowledging lady-talent in traditionally lady-spheres is not the same as recognizing that human variation in talent and preference cuts across genders. There are not “natural” career fits for women vs. men, and even if there were, do you think it’s accidental that the lowest paying professions (caretaking in all forms) are traditionally female? We make career decisions based on what we’re good at, yes, but what we’re good out is often borne out of deeply ingrained and unfair societal messages about gender and skill.

Why this is dangerous: Encouraging your daughter to be a nurse and your son to be a surgeon because she’s a girl and he’s a boy perpetuates long term wage disparity. Maybe those are their ideal careers, but maybe you just can’t wrap your head around your son’s caretaking strengths and your daughters’ love of knives.

5. Family: Having a wife, sister, mother or daughter does not make you not a misogynist.

Why this is dangerous: You can’t hide your misogyny behind a family photo.

Related Post: Why family leave policy is at the root of gender disparity in leadership

Related Post: The death of “pretty”. Ick.

7 Comments

Filed under Gender, Hollywood, Politics, Sex

Feathers, Sequins, Rainbows

Happy Pride, y’all! Nothing restores my faith in humanity or my hope for the future quite like the Pride parade. What color, what joy, what love! I spent the first hour with mascara-laden tears leaking out from behind the my plastic sunglasses. The triple whammy of teachers (“I’m proud of my LGBTQ students!”), veterans, and local high school students was more than my feeble and mimosa-soaked heart could handle.

I feel so lucky to live in a community like this, full of people and businesses so effusive in their support for equality, dignity, and respect for all. The diversity of the crowd (not to mention the participants), is my favorite part. All ages, races, family structures were represented.

Going for some sort of androgynous, punky, patriotic thing

Mayor Emanuel kicked things off

Balloons!

So beautiful!

Happy Rainbows!

Feathers!

Here’s where the leaky tears began

Related Post: Pride 2011

Related Post: Views about gay marriage are trending up.

2 Comments

Filed under Art, Chicago, Politics

Cart Before the Horse

Here’s a game: guess what percentage of Congress is female. Too hard? Okay, would you say it’s higher or lower than in Mexico? How about in Cambodia? Duh, it’s lower than Sweden’s, but do you think it’s higher or lower than in the UAE? It’s lower, on all three counts, a paltry 17%.

To be fair, some of these countries have instituted quota systems, mandating a certain percentage of seats be held for women (like Algeria). That’s certainly one way of going about it, but it wouldn’t my first choice.

Let’s look at another chart. This one is a state-by-state look at laws benefiting new parents. This comes from the National Partnership for Women and Families via Mother Jones. Laws like parental leave, paid sick days, and breastfeeding protections are rolled into the score.

A quota system that mandates X% of seats be held by women (or any other marginalized group of people), doesn’t address the causes of inequality, but attempts to rectify it through opportunity grants. The problem with a quota is that it undermines the very people it attempts to elevate by explicitly declaring their participation is a result of government action, instead of merit (or luck, wealth, notoriety and all the other ways people get elected in this country).

Some people make the same argument about affirmative action (which allows an institution to use race as a consideration in decision-making, but not to have quotas). Any black student or female MBA candidate who has ever heard (or read in the faces of their colleagues), “You’re only here because you’re X” knows that some people still view their success as a perk of their demographic profile.

I posted the new parent map because a solution that only looks forward and neglects the cause of disparity is no solution at all; it’s a band-aid. Recent  research shows that the greatest income gap (and also achievement) is not between men and women, but between women with children and women without. In our society, women typically take on a substantially higher percentage of child care responsibilities, so laws affecting child care and family leave disproportionately affect women. There are a lot of reasons that women don’t get elected for office, but the biggest one is because they don’t run. Give women the tools and resources to pursue any professional goal (political or otherwise), and maybe we’ll see those numbers improve.

In other words, if you want to fix that chart at the top (and maybe compete with Cambodia), we have to fix the map first.

Related Post: Happy Equal Pay Day and why the wage gap persists.

Related Post: How I got a raise.

Related Post: Second vs. Third Wave feminism on The Good Wife.

2 Comments

Filed under Gender, Politics

Guest Post: Role-Reversal with a 17 Year Age Gap

A few weeks ago, I wrote a Good Men Project essay called “Could I Fall in Love with the Bus Driver?” It was about the intersection of gender and class, and how I was rethinking my own assumptions about what kind of “qualifications” I had for a partner. My friend Kate (who has guest posted here before), wrote a response. Turns out, these are not hypothetical questions for her:

*       *        *        *         *

I started dating Rick in the middle of my senior year in college. He was an under-employed real estate agent, stuck in the rut of the recession. He also happened to be 17 years older than me, and was divorced with a child. But he was so good-looking. And he made me laugh. I fully expected it not to go anywhere. I had plans, you see, and getting into a relationship was not in them.

You know what they say about plans, “the best laid…” Fast forward to graduation, six months later, and Rick and I were still together. He and his child met my parents that summer, and we ended up spending the holidays that year together. Soon after that, we were talking about the future, and my dreams (and my five, ten, and 20 year plans). Rick and I talked about the possibility of me moving, going to grad school, joining the Peace Corps or something else that would possibly separate us.

Rick doesn’t have a college degree, and values my education highly. He’s told me that no matter what, he stands by my decisions and I shouldn’t let him hold me back from anything. If I want to move to pursue my goals, the most likely scenario would be him coming with. This absolute support of me made me realize some things about what I wanted and needed in a partner.

As the good, middle class, well educated young woman I am, I always assumed that I would marry a middle class well educated young man, somebody my “equal” in terms of economic status and educational level. However, that type of young man, the type I dated in college, was more than willing to leave me to found their own start-up or join the Navy. I needed a partner who was instead ready to back me up, and follow me, instead of vice-versa.

It is really hard reversing gender roles. It is especially hard reversing gender roles with a 17 year age gap and a college degree difference. There were a few people who implied Rick wasn’t “good enough” for me, or “smart enough” or whatever you might imagine “enough” because of his circumstances. But those people who judge our relationship aren’t the people in it. They don’t see the back end, the unconditional support that I have from him, or even just the way he makes me giggle over the smallest things. The differences between us don’t damage our relationship, but make it stronger.

What I imagined in life was nowhere close to what I have ended up getting. Rick proposed to me a year ago, and we’re getting married sometime in the next year. So I guess I did kind of fall for the “bus driver.” The result? A wonderful, strong, fulfilling relationship with the man I am going to spend the rest of my life with. I wouldn’t trade that for the world.

Related Post: Kate’s guest post about Cosmo, kink, and sexual honesty.

Related Post: Kate’s guest post about people telling her she’s too skinny.

2 Comments

Filed under Gender, Guest Posts

How Biased Am I?

I decided to put myself to a little test. I was inspired by Jennifer Dalton’s artsy media analysis profiled on Jezebel. She does some neat visual stuff with the gender breakdowns of talk show guests. For example, she calculated that in 2010, 79% of The Daily Show‘s guests were men. Colbert was even worse, at 82%. Rachel Maddow herself hosted 80% male guests. Yowza.

To be fair, those three shows are politically themed, and is it their fault if politicians are overwhelmingly male? I’d argue that the pundits are reflecting the inequality of the pool, not necessarily promoting the gender gap. We could dig further and ask what percentage of male congressmen have been featured on these shows versus the percentage of female congresswomen. The issue is, there are so few female congresswomen that I doubt we’d even get a viable statistical sample! I’d like Dalton to blow it out further and and see how many of the female guests on Stewart and Colbert were actresses promoting movies vs. substantive players on the national or international scene.

Annnnnywaaay, here’s what I thought I’d do. I have a category over the right sidebar called “Really Good Writing by Other People”. This is what I use when the point of my lazy post is to say, “Go here, read this.” In some capacity, by assigning a writer or blogger that label, I’m doling out Emily-influence points. So… the question is, who is getting Emily points?

I dug through the last 3 months of posts that warranted the RGWBOP label and tallied the gender of the authors to whom I was directing traffic. In some cases, one post included more than one author, so those counted separately. Only one was listed twice (Kate Fridkis at Eat the Damn Cake). There were 56 writers, including a double count for Kate. Here’s the breakdown:

Actually more even than I would have thought, given the Rosie the Riveter icon on the banner….

Related Post: This type of analysis is how this whole blog thing got started, remember?

Related Post: Vanity Fair’s big earners list reflects some craaaazy skewed influence.

3 Comments

Filed under Art, Gender, Media, Politics