A “Relations” 3-part Series - Part 1: On Women

Prefatory note: I’ve decided to do a series of posts that share a theme; this one and the next two. I was a little reluctant to do this, partly because I’m concern that I’ll be misinterpreted (in what I say or even about why I’m saying it). But I think, or at least hope, that that won’t happen.

"Despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, I have not yet been able to answer the great question that has never been answered: What does a woman want?" (Sigmund Freud)

When I was in the 5th grade, Carla C. said she loved me. Ever since women have thrown me for a loop. I’ve tried figuring them out on my own; I’ve turned to other guys; I’ve turned to girls; I’ve even tried the media – everything from books like ‘Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus’ to shows like ‘Sex and the City’. But, despite my efforts, I’m still no closer to figuring women out or how I should to relate to them. Chicks do and say things that are sometimes just surprising; things that I wouldn’t have done were I “in her shoes”. Now I think I’m already walking a fine line here. I can already imagine some girls starting to say things like: “you can’t generalize like that! It’s not women, it’s just individual people! Oh, and don’t call us chicks!” Well, sure. Some of the most reasonable people I know are girls; not everyone’s going to fit the mold. But I think I can still justifiably make sweeping generalizations (of the kind I want to make). I’m not being sexist or misogynistic here; my intent is the farthest thing for that. What I’m not saying is that women are irrational or whatever; what I am saying is that we (i.e. men and women) are, in certain ways, unsure about each other. And so what I want to try to accomplish here is: provide an account for why there (still) exists today a disparity between men and women; why there’s heaps of literature like ‘Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus’ and why so much of comedy is grounded on the differences between us.

Having said that, I can only speculate as to how things were between men and women before feminism (e.g. romantically, socially, professionally). But I’d imagine things were less confusing; people must have been, generally, clear on what to expect. Back then there were pretty clearly defined gender roles. As far as I’m aware, before feminism, there were also generally accepted social conventions which governed most of the different ways men and women related to each other. These conventions were commonly understood and, at the time, accepted. While some of those conventions or norms were unfair or inappropriate, men and women at least knew what was what. Feminism changed everything. First-wave feminism (as in, bra burning plus equality for women) destroyed the majority of these expectations and conventions, to the benefit of women and society at large. But a lot of those gains were largely eroded by the effects of second-wave feminism (as in, consensual sex between a man and a women, where the woman wasn’t the initiator, promotes the subjection of women… oh, and so does failing to spell women ‘womyn’). And even though there has been progress since then, there largely remains a gulf between the sexes: neither men nor women are sure about what to expect from the other sex or what constitutes appropriate behavior. At the core, this is why I think men and women often struggle to understand and effectively related to one another.

So our current environment is one which lacks clear and commonly accepted (and deemed acceptable) ways for men and women to relate to each other. The olde-time values are often asserted, not exclusively by religion, while the benefits sought by our cultural changes in the late 20th century are ambiguously stressed. Yet those ideologies are constantly conflicting with each other in that which indoctrinates our thinking: the old are as they ever were (reflected in Barbie dolls and in how some colors identified as being gender specific) while the new are commercialized and bastardized (through things like Dove’s ‘Campaign for Real Beauty’). The result is that we’re left without an understanding of what are reasonable expectations and acceptable ways to behave; people are struggling to relate to everyone qua person, rather than qua man or qua woman. The problem is compounded by people who feel justified in being hyper-sensitive under the banner of political correctness. The challenge we face is where to go from here. This relational problem, I think, will persist until we figure that out. Of course not all possible solutions are worthwhile. For instance a universal socially androgynous world might sound perfect but it’s unrealistically overly ideal and, I believe, a sour apple; it looks good in principle, but would be disappointing were we to have it.

Take special note, though, that I’m not presenting or discussing what feminism is, what it sought to accomplish, or whatever. All I’m doing is pointing out one of its effects: a vacuum between the sexes; a foundation of confusion. Ultimately, what I’m saying here is that we presently lack a proper understanding of how we should act around one another. And without that men and women aren’t equipped to understand or know what to expect from each other. This current state of affairs is why, I believe, women throw me for a loop at every turn. I could say more, but I think that’s enough for now. This is just my spur-of-the-moment thoughts on the subject. I could be wrong. After all, what do I know.