Now that I'm working at an organisation with a mission of fighting for women's empowerment, I spend most of my day thinking about one of two things, women and power. Even when my mind wanders, it usually stays within the realm of these two concepts.
The other day as I was walking home through the blistering heat, I started to think about how interesting gender is. My Race Thinking class expanded my understanding of the social construction of concepts like race and gender, but the social construction of gender has never been my area of expertise. I remember reading bell hooks in my undergrad years and running around saying things like "dismantle patriarchy!" and "deconstruct! deconstruct!" Gone are those idealistic days.
Ok, so gender is a social construct. I can get my head around that. There's no biological reasoning that women tend to cook and men can change the oil. Obviously. Still, I'm not convinced that a deconstruction of these roles is entirely necessary. Just as Gandhi argued that caste is not detrimental to society, it is the hierarchical bastardisation of caste that is problematic.
So long as everyone is empowered to consciously choose their role, it's all good, right? If my dear friend wants her man to open doors for her and buy her expensive jewels, who's to say she can't because it's disadvantageous to "the feminist cause." She has made a conscious decision that she prefers playing that role, and I fully support her decision.
This brings me to another point. There are people that rarely, if ever, fit into the gender roles assigned to them. Societies have created names for these people and they are usually accompanied by assumptions about their sexuality. These are the tomboys and sissies of the world.
The tomboy: the blossoming lesbian who wore jeans and short hair, loved to fish, and was the first one to pick up the worm on the sidewalk. I always envied her because she was more like my brothers than I was. The sissy: the obviously gay momma's-boy who couldn't catch a ball to save his life, preferred watching Goldern Girls to the football game, and always hid in the back during that game of dodge-ball. In short, me.
I'm an avid listener of This American Life on NPR, and they recently had an episode all about "sissies." It was an interesting show, and you should go to the website to have a listen. Anyway, there was a segment by Dan Savage, the syndicated columnist, where he basically makes the argument that sissies are actually the most courageous guys out there. They risk social exclusion and discrimination by acting the way they feel most natural and not the way they are supposed to.
This all may have been true a few years ago, but I think that it's quickly changing. There have always been the frightening "straight-acting" gay boys, and there is the recent hipness of the emerging "metrosexual." Suddenly being a sissy is cool. Men with manicures and women with car know-how seem the hottest rage. Is Carrie to blame for wearing men's "underpants?" Or is the Western world finally realising that having a few well-groomed men and handymen –er– women around is not such a bad idea?
I know that I certainly wasn't a sissy as a mere act of social defiance, at least not consciously. I just was because I could never catch. Still can't.
Flown by mariposa at 09:47 AM on May 25, 2005
Comments
Why do I feel like the jewelry/open doors thing is a commentary on me? Eh, that's alright. Ex bought me tons of gifts and paid for everything but I'm having a lot more fun with grad-student Mr. Aerospace learning about motorcycles. ;)
Warning: I know that I am primarily being heteronormative in this comment. I don't need to be called on it. I know that's what I'm doing.
I don't know that everything we consider a gender construct is really constructed. Men and women are biologically different. Women are the ones stuck not only carrying the baby but also caring for the child after it's born. I'm not saying men can't change a diaper, I'm saying that if I woman wants to travel lightly she needs to NOT have children. At what point does the biological role (carrying the fetus physically) change to the societal role (protecting the child physically)? Is it even possible to deconstruct this role? Or does the emotional cost of carrying a fetus make it impossible?
As for the emotional gender constructs (hello, Amazingly Insecure Girl, welcome to my home), can we really say that some of the emotional differences don't come in part due to biology? I'm not seeing Mr. Aerospace's estrogen levels changing like mine do in the course of 28 days.
Then there are those seemingly clear constructs--men tending to fix cars, women tending to knit.
Originally knitting was a man's field. When it become industrialized with the invention of the knitting machine it became women's work.
I have recently learnt how to change my oil (and never will I spend $20 on that again!), clean carbs, read spark plugs to see how rich or lean the fuel-air mixture is, use a timing light to get timing right, use a monometer (sp?) to balance carbs, bleed and flush brakes, and parallel park (I failed that on the test but didn't hit a cone). Mr. Aerospace still does most of the motorcycle work (it IS his bike) but it's nice to know how to help without freaking out over oil.
As for playing with gender constructs--perhaps it all comes down to sex. Gay, straight, bisexual, we're attracted to whom we're attracted to for reasons beyond our control, socially constructed reasons, perhaps, but biological reasons, too.
If I'm attracted to a five o'clock shadow, which indicates higher testosterone levels, that seems to be biological. The dilated pupils that candlelight gives also seems to be a biological attraction.
But what about social attraction?
While I was changing my oil (which, by the way, I did without a creeper, so yes, I was wriggling around on my back on the ground without bitching about it) a casual friend of Mr. Aerospace walked by. He said it was cool that I was learning to change my oil because it was "sexy." After I'd changed my oil I had a streak of grease on my cheek. Mr. Aerospace thought it was adorable. I could understand, because Mr. Aerospace is ALWAYS working on his bike...
Similarly, I think it's fantastic when Mr. Aerospace cooks dinner for us.
Maybe those attractions come down to appreciation. Since I understand (a little) what it takes to work on a car or motorcycle, I will appreciate my lover even more when he does it for me. Since he knows how much work goes into cooking, he will appreciate me even more when I do it. Maybe being appreciated is the sexiest thing.
I think I've gone way off topic here...
Posted by: Amanda at May 27, 2005 07:28 PM
| 