I wonder if I don't get feminism because I'm approaching it from an idea of equality. Because, the more I think about the women I know that I would call "feminists"—and I want it to be clear that I don't use that word with any kind of negative connotation—don't seem interested in being treated equally with men. At least, not in the universal sense of an all-out, across-the-board equality.
Rather, I do think they want equality when it comes to employment, opportunities, and advancement (for a great depiction of where society stands right now regarding this kind of progress, check out this
Newsweek, but not at the cost of sacrificing what makes them feminine. In other words, I think they want access to the boys' club, but they don't necessarily want to be "one of the boys."
But isn't that a "have cake and eat it too" scenario I'm proposing?
No.
Why not? Well, besides the obvious (and yet, not always as clearly obvious as everyone would like) fact that they are
not boys, most women want to be accepted and judged because of who they are
as women. So rather than being treated as another guy, they want to just be treated as a girl within a group of guys.
And that's why this is a revelation for me—not because I'm discovering that girls and boys are different, but more because I think I'm understanding a bit more that our differences can't be simply glossed over. Put another way, I'm pretty sure women don't want their womanhood erased in favor of being treated like another one of my "boys." Instead, they want to be accepted into the group as another relevant voice—respected for what they contribute, regardless if that contribution
feels different from what Bill or Jack or Eric would normally bring to the table.
The obstacle, as I see it, then isn't inclusion, but rather empathy—I think most guys aren't naturally dismissive of women, but they don't realize that they think (and therefore act) differently in social situations.
We (men) think we're doing good, and yet we're actually just creating a
different—yet still awkward—situation where women now need to traverse socially.
Now, to be fair to the unfair sex, there is a massive double standard here. Basically, if a woman
does want to be treated like one of the guys, then you need to include her. But on the other hand, a woman might
act like she wants to be included because she thinks she
has to—because she wants to be included in the group, just maybe not in that particular dynamic.
Confusing, right?
But that's why blanket statements about gender are generally ludicrous to begin with. And yet, even if this isn't a completely accurate depiction of the female psyche, I think it's still a more accurate step in the right direction.
The problem is, though, that it's not necessarily easy to identify which women want to join in., and which are just pretending—I know plenty of women who give it as good as any guy, and yet are also incredibly sensitive about taking the same type of crap from guys. Again, this would seem, on the surface, hypocritical, but is it fair to accuse them of that aforementioned "cake" scenario? I'm starting to lean towards the "No" column.
That doesn't mean there aren't triflin' girls—no matter what, individuals are who they are, separate from race, age, nationality, and yes, even gender. But to think that
all women fall into that category is a fallacy that should only be perpetrated by men who are probably so ignorant that their opinions are invariably going to sound like the pot calling their gender-opposite kettles black.
The problem then is, what can be done about it? Even armed with this new-found self-awareness, doesn't the biological and social wiring I've been subjected to prevent me from actually changing? In other words, I'm now "book smart" about this issue—I academically grasp the concept of gender inequality on a new level—and yet I wonder if that's going to translate to my daily practice.
But that's when I look over my words again. One in particular stands out: Practice. Yes, lip-service would probably be applauded in certain audiences:
That guy gets
it. But I don't want to just be saying the words—I genuinely believe they are the
right words, and therefore should be implemented.
So how does someone get better at doing something?
Practice.
It won't be an immediate thing—either for me or for the whole male gender (obviously). But if I can remain
conscious of it—and keep reminding myself in situations where women might even possibly be uncomfortable to pause and re-evaluate how
I’m acting, then gradually it should become part of my nature—and maybe the other men around me will pick up on it.
Interestingly, I’m currently reading
Blink by Malcolm Gladwell, which is all about gut reactions and that instantaneous moment of judgment that informs so much of our daily lives. One thing he discuss in the book is the idea of being able to “prime” minds to unconsciously act differently. In other words—in his example—if someone sees positive images of black men such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Barak Obama, and Arthur Ashe, they are more likely to be able to complete this
race test that asks the test-taker to associate certain words with whites or blacks. What the test shows is that, without “priming,” most Americans—white
and black—inevitably hesitate associating good words with blacks, to varying degrees of delay.
I wonder, then, if that’s what it would take for men to eliminate the barriers and obstacles society has erected in front of women. If, in other words, men simply need to “prime” themselves with images of successful, intelligent, and powerful women in order to unconsciously treat women as equals, rather than unconsciously treat them as unequals.
I wonder, then, too, which examples would do this…
I also wonder if this "onus" solely on the men? Of course not. At the end of the day, we're not mindreaders, and if a woman isn't giving any indication—either during or after—that she didn't feel completely at ease, then it's going to take a much longer time for these types of societal overhauls to be accomplished. Yes, it will take bravery on their part—they might find themselves left out of things when men think they don't need to change their ways to accommodate women. And there might be times when, upon reflection, those were situations that the woman probably
didn’t actually want to be a part of.
I know—the idea that “guys need to be guys,” is inherently a false claim, but only to an
extent. Guys shouldn’t feel compelled to have designated times for them to “act like guys.” But when I say that, I also mean that guys who think they “have” to have these moments are probably never going to get passed the societal constructs that have kept us stuck in this mindset in the first place.
Men do need to change. That is clear. The thing is figuring out how to change. And, also, figuring out what women need to do to affect this change—including making some changes of their own.
This is unfair. Why should women, who did nothing to be put in this place other than being different, have to change when clearly it’s a male problem?
Because, as I said, we’re not mind-readers. There’s too much tradition, genetics, and precedent to fall back on to make it impossible to simply make a sweeping shift in a cultural mindset. Without input from women—and not just “you guys need to change”—it’s fairly unlikely we can figure it out on our own.
Especially when a lot of men—either consciously or unconsciously—see no
reason why they should have to change.
Realistically, I think this is going to be a grassroots operation. It’s going to take individual women to help the men in their lives realize that something is wrong in the way they’re being treated. They need to make it clear how they want to be treated—and make it clear when they feel that the situation isn’t conducive to men and women being equals.
It’s going to take a ton of courage. And, again, it’s completely unfair. But this isn’t about rationality. I’m completely aware of how messed up this is, and yet I still can probably look in hindsight and cringe at the way I acted—and how it probably made my female friends feel.
Perhaps this is just rambling—perhaps I’m way off-base in my analysis of this situation. But if that’s the case, then great! Know why? Because the only way I’m going to know is if someone points it out to me—which means that at least a dialogue is beginning.
Then I might be able to have a conversation with a woman and not have my mind automatically label her as “unequal,” even if I don’t truly believe that.
And then I only have to figure out how to
talk to a woman…
