So a strong theme of what we have talked about in womens' studies is the ridiculous amount of effort we all (men and women) put into the way we look; and not even for ourselves, but for the acceptance of others.
My friend sent me this video today, totally out of the blue, and I find it to be a perfect explanation of what we are really doing. With all the emphasis the media and society put on us to be physically "acceptable," we lose sight of what is actually important.
So, enjoy:
Remember that while appearance is sometimes important, it is not everything. What is inside you matters: your passion, your kindness, your intelligence, your humor. Develop these, because as you age, your skin will decompose far quicker than your personality.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Friday, April 15, 2011
Damsel in Distress
So recently we've been talking about the term "feminist" in class and how it comes with a negative social connotation. Well this morning a possible explanation for what a feminist actually is came to me.
Take the story of a damsel in distress. A beautiful woman is taken captive by a maniacal male villain. She has been tied up and left on the train tracks to perish by the approaching train, unless the brawny and handsome male love interest comes to rescue her.
While this story is cute and romantic, it leaves the audience with the implication that the damsel wasn't smart, cunning, or independent enough to sit up and scoot her butt off of those pesky metal rails.
So we have the "feminist" version of this story. Now this is where I see the problem arising. When the average person thinks of a "feminist" they probably see this:
The damsel in distress is taken captive by a maniacal male villain. She has been tied up and left on the train tracks to perish. Enter the brawny and stupid male love interest; he has come to rescue her, and lets the "feminist" damsel know this. But rather than accepting his help, the "feminist" decides that she can do it all by herself. She sharply spits, "How dare you assume I'm helpless, you ignorant prick! What do you think I am? Some treasure or prize you can claim for your "valiant" and "courageous" efforts? Well too bad, because I can free myself without a man needing to help me!" She then proceeds to cut herself free, storm pass the awestruck man without the whisper of a "thank you for the thought of helping save my life," and leaves him as the train speeds by throwing a cloud of dust into the abandoned man's face.
Now again, I have a feeling this is the idea that most people have from "feminists." They see us as some sort of crazy, power hungry, tyrannical-sort-of-bitch that can't accept any help from something with a XY chromosome. This is a problem. So, in order to make it more appropriate for what "feminists" really are, I've written my own version of this melodramatic tale.
The damsel in distress is taken captive by a maniacal male villain. She has been tied up and left on the train tracks to perish. Enter the intelligent and average-looking male love interest; he has come to rescue her, and asks the true feminist damsel if he can help in anyway. But by this time, the damsel has already scooted herself off of the track, out of the way of the speeding train, and was in the process of finding a sharp rock to cut herself free. She notices the caring man and says to him, "Hey, would you mind helping me cut this binding rope from my body? It would really narrow down on the time it takes me to escape..." The love interest replies, "Why of course! I'm here to help, and help I shall! In fact, I brought a knife that will be much more effective for freeing you." He carefully cuts the rope, as she wiggles out of the binding in order to make the process easier, and helps her off of the ground because it's easier on her knees this way. The damsel looks at her helpful partner and says, "Thanks for coming to make sure I was safe; now let's go find that manipulative villain and make sure he doesn't cause any more problems for the other towns-folk." The two leave the scene holding hands knowing that they share a bond of love and equality in their healthy relationship.
So it's a little more involved to represent what a feminist actually is, but it is extremely important that the population knows "feminists" aren't just some crazy women trying to take revenge on the male sex. Feminism is about equality, and that's it. It's about caring for people no matter what sex, creed, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or race. It's about being human, equally.
So the next time someone says they don't understand what those "crazy feminists" are "whining about," remember this tale, and help make the feminist name something worth calling yourself.
Take the story of a damsel in distress. A beautiful woman is taken captive by a maniacal male villain. She has been tied up and left on the train tracks to perish by the approaching train, unless the brawny and handsome male love interest comes to rescue her.
While this story is cute and romantic, it leaves the audience with the implication that the damsel wasn't smart, cunning, or independent enough to sit up and scoot her butt off of those pesky metal rails.
So we have the "feminist" version of this story. Now this is where I see the problem arising. When the average person thinks of a "feminist" they probably see this:
The damsel in distress is taken captive by a maniacal male villain. She has been tied up and left on the train tracks to perish. Enter the brawny and stupid male love interest; he has come to rescue her, and lets the "feminist" damsel know this. But rather than accepting his help, the "feminist" decides that she can do it all by herself. She sharply spits, "How dare you assume I'm helpless, you ignorant prick! What do you think I am? Some treasure or prize you can claim for your "valiant" and "courageous" efforts? Well too bad, because I can free myself without a man needing to help me!" She then proceeds to cut herself free, storm pass the awestruck man without the whisper of a "thank you for the thought of helping save my life," and leaves him as the train speeds by throwing a cloud of dust into the abandoned man's face.
Now again, I have a feeling this is the idea that most people have from "feminists." They see us as some sort of crazy, power hungry, tyrannical-sort-of-bitch that can't accept any help from something with a XY chromosome. This is a problem. So, in order to make it more appropriate for what "feminists" really are, I've written my own version of this melodramatic tale.
The damsel in distress is taken captive by a maniacal male villain. She has been tied up and left on the train tracks to perish. Enter the intelligent and average-looking male love interest; he has come to rescue her, and asks the true feminist damsel if he can help in anyway. But by this time, the damsel has already scooted herself off of the track, out of the way of the speeding train, and was in the process of finding a sharp rock to cut herself free. She notices the caring man and says to him, "Hey, would you mind helping me cut this binding rope from my body? It would really narrow down on the time it takes me to escape..." The love interest replies, "Why of course! I'm here to help, and help I shall! In fact, I brought a knife that will be much more effective for freeing you." He carefully cuts the rope, as she wiggles out of the binding in order to make the process easier, and helps her off of the ground because it's easier on her knees this way. The damsel looks at her helpful partner and says, "Thanks for coming to make sure I was safe; now let's go find that manipulative villain and make sure he doesn't cause any more problems for the other towns-folk." The two leave the scene holding hands knowing that they share a bond of love and equality in their healthy relationship.
So it's a little more involved to represent what a feminist actually is, but it is extremely important that the population knows "feminists" aren't just some crazy women trying to take revenge on the male sex. Feminism is about equality, and that's it. It's about caring for people no matter what sex, creed, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or race. It's about being human, equally.
So the next time someone says they don't understand what those "crazy feminists" are "whining about," remember this tale, and help make the feminist name something worth calling yourself.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Miss Sarah Perry; Mrs. Rupert Grint; Ms. Wait, this doesn't mean divorced?
So the other week, Ithaca College hosted the Mr. and Miss Ithaca competition. While standing in line, I noticed that the female candidate was not "Mrs. Ithaca" while the male one was "Mr." It occurred to me that males have only one pre-nom/ title as they go through life, but women all over the world have a choice of 3, all which depend on their marital status.
As you may know, Miss is for an unmarried young woman, Mrs. is designated to married women, and Ms. is for women who used to be betrothed but, for whatever reason, they are no longer.
I mentioned this phenomena to my friend who was standing in line with me, and her reaction was a "Huh. that's funny."
Yes, yes it is. It is funny, because we still use these titles in modern day society. Whether or not a boy is 5 years old or 50, he will always be Mr. Y chromosome. But a woman will have her title changed depending on the status of her left ring finger.
So as I said, all over the world this happens, but the connotations have changed. In France, a woman who is assumed to be married (meaning she is above the age of 30) is called Madame. But if you make the mistake of calling a woman who is actually unmarried, you will get a scolding. Part of this is probably because women, in general, don't like to reveal their age and by titling them "Madame" you assume they are old. Another reason is because it reminds women, who are of age to marry, that they are still alone.
The same thing goes for Ms. Many women who are no longer married switch between the titles of Miss and Ms. Some of them want to seem young again, so they prefer "Miss," others want to be reminded that they are older, and superior because of that age, so they prefer "Ms." A third possibility, is that women who are divorced prefer to not be reminded that they were married, so "Mrs." insults them.
Now the point of this blog? Well one, why do we still maintain these titles? They don't really do anything for society except cause pain to those who don't want to be reminded of their age. I guess there is the positive that you can compliment a woman with "Miss" but isn't that really a backhanded insulting compliment to those who wish to be younger?
The second reason for this blog: I have been totally disillusioned to the original intent of "Ms."
A few generations of women back, the same question of "Why do we need titles" was brought up. Men aren't judged on their marital status, they are always the same Mr. Man, but what you title a woman depends on her ability to attract the male sex. Miss gave the connotation of a young, innocent, weak woman. Mrs. was a title given to those who have achieve marital status; her life has been completed. Well the proposition of finding a neutral title was put into affect: "Ms." was actually created to create a "fill-in-the-blank" status that allowed women to be free from their attachment to men.
However, this did not last long. The title was given a negative connotation and was brought down from the original positive intention. In fact, I always though Ms. was an awful name given to "old hags." And interestingly enough, my guy friend disclosed to me that he has never heard of the title "Ms." he just refers to women as either Miss or Mrs.
So now I ask again, can we bring back this neutral name? Because the confusion and hurt feelings that result from the title of Mrs. and Miss, not to mention the unfortunate attachment to men that these titles really insinuate, don't seem like very good reasons for keeping these titles around.
As you may know, Miss is for an unmarried young woman, Mrs. is designated to married women, and Ms. is for women who used to be betrothed but, for whatever reason, they are no longer.
I mentioned this phenomena to my friend who was standing in line with me, and her reaction was a "Huh. that's funny."
Yes, yes it is. It is funny, because we still use these titles in modern day society. Whether or not a boy is 5 years old or 50, he will always be Mr. Y chromosome. But a woman will have her title changed depending on the status of her left ring finger.
So as I said, all over the world this happens, but the connotations have changed. In France, a woman who is assumed to be married (meaning she is above the age of 30) is called Madame. But if you make the mistake of calling a woman who is actually unmarried, you will get a scolding. Part of this is probably because women, in general, don't like to reveal their age and by titling them "Madame" you assume they are old. Another reason is because it reminds women, who are of age to marry, that they are still alone.
The same thing goes for Ms. Many women who are no longer married switch between the titles of Miss and Ms. Some of them want to seem young again, so they prefer "Miss," others want to be reminded that they are older, and superior because of that age, so they prefer "Ms." A third possibility, is that women who are divorced prefer to not be reminded that they were married, so "Mrs." insults them.
Now the point of this blog? Well one, why do we still maintain these titles? They don't really do anything for society except cause pain to those who don't want to be reminded of their age. I guess there is the positive that you can compliment a woman with "Miss" but isn't that really a backhanded insulting compliment to those who wish to be younger?
The second reason for this blog: I have been totally disillusioned to the original intent of "Ms."
A few generations of women back, the same question of "Why do we need titles" was brought up. Men aren't judged on their marital status, they are always the same Mr. Man, but what you title a woman depends on her ability to attract the male sex. Miss gave the connotation of a young, innocent, weak woman. Mrs. was a title given to those who have achieve marital status; her life has been completed. Well the proposition of finding a neutral title was put into affect: "Ms." was actually created to create a "fill-in-the-blank" status that allowed women to be free from their attachment to men.
However, this did not last long. The title was given a negative connotation and was brought down from the original positive intention. In fact, I always though Ms. was an awful name given to "old hags." And interestingly enough, my guy friend disclosed to me that he has never heard of the title "Ms." he just refers to women as either Miss or Mrs.
So now I ask again, can we bring back this neutral name? Because the confusion and hurt feelings that result from the title of Mrs. and Miss, not to mention the unfortunate attachment to men that these titles really insinuate, don't seem like very good reasons for keeping these titles around.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)