Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Double Standard: A Rant

Disclaimer: What I am about to discuss is volatile. Please remember that I know that, and still chose to discuss it, proving that I am somewhat idiotic. However, I would like to say, that if after you finish reading my article, you decide that I have exempted men from all blame about the current state of our society, then please know that I have not. What I have to say deals with a complex issue that cannot be contained in the one argument that I am about to make. Hence, have your say, but don't get mad at me if I did not include the entire picture of the problem.

When I was a freshman and had only been to college for a few weeks, my friends and I watched "X-Men" one weekend. That was my first time watching it. As I remember, I was with three or four guys and three of them decided to walk me back to my dorm after the movie. On the way across campus I made some comment about the physical attractiveness of Wolverine. It was meant more as a joke than anything else. I remember that one guy disagreed with me on the basis of the fact that Wolverine has large knives that come out of his knuckes and a bad haircut (both are valid points). One guy just laughed (I'm married to that guy now). And the other pointed out that if one of the guys had made such a comment concerning Halle Berry (may her name never appear on this blog again) I would have been offended. I did not, at the time, mention that I have been in the presence of guys making such comments about women many times and have never had a problem with that. But the comment did make me think.

It is true that most women would have been upset if a guy made a comment about an actress similar to my comment about an actor. Most girls would also fail to see a problem with their own comments of that nature concerning men. And, in my experience, it is girls who make the more disgusting comments in the presence of mixed company. Hey, but I thought that women were more emotional and did not care about stuff like that and were more sensitive, hence, they would not say something that would make someone uncomfortable. Men, now, they're just a bunch of horny bastards who want to sleep with whatever new thing walks by, thus it is completely insensitive for one of them to make a comment as mild as, "She's pretty." That obviously means that something deep and disturbing is going on in that guy's psychosis. Uh, huh.

That's just an example of a double standard that I see in females all the time. It is also okay for a woman to say terrible things about her significant other on a regular basis to her girlfriends, sisters, mom etc. But on no account must a man ever think something slightly derogatory about his woman. Why is it okay for women to be completely insensitive to men and yet it is the end of the world if a guy just diagrees with a female? He should be shunned, nagged, irritated, annoyed, poked with sticks and dropped into a vat of asphalt. As my funny friends used to say, "Throw rocks at boys." And as I used to reply, "I have a good one, so I'm benevolent."

This double standard is acceptable because of the confusing problem of modern feminism. Feminism is not about equality for women. I can say that with ease because women have more than equality, they are more equal than men. A woman can be verbally abusive to a man with no consequences, in fact, she is often applauded for her efforts by her girlfriends. Also, we still discuss the subject of inequality in the workplace without ever giving thought to a few relevant factors. Factor 1) women usually eat up more benefits than men due to a little problem called pregnancy. Factor 2) women are less likely to work in a CEO type position due a little thing called, wanting to be at home with her children for more than two hours a day. No, feminism is about power, not equality. Power ignores biological facts, equality sees the biological differences and attempts to make both sides equal while appreciating the differences.

I know that some women do like working and even want the high up job positions. I'm fine with that. But I often find that women who want these positions, or women in general, tend to look down on those of us who would rather just stay at home. It's like there's something wrong with a woman who wants to be married and have children. She's obviously a rare breed. Who would want to put up with spit-up and poopy diapers and cleaning the house? It seems to me that women of this type are seen as inferior because they are more selfless and have a sense of obligation and duty. Because they want to give. It's wrong and evil to want to do that. You should have only your own interests at heart and if you get stuck at home you should make a big fuss and complain all the time. Never be happy unless you are out doing what you want to do. And you should not want to do things that are oriented toward making your children's lives good or having a happy home. You only do what you want, remember? Which means that you do not want to do things that would inconvenience you or detract from all the things you want to do. Which are not allowed to include self-sacrifice or obligation, because obligation is bad and responsibility is too. If you are a stay-at-home mom then you are automatically oppressed and should complain constantly because you obviously did not want to have a family with that man that you chose to marry. He must have hoodwinked you somehow.

Everything is constantly blamed on men. We are always asking them to be "men." I'm not sure what that means anymore. Let me think, men are more visually oriented, they tend to want to solve problems more rather than listening to constant griping about a problem, they will do crappy things (like take out the trash, make dinner after they've been working all day, work all day at a job they hate just to keep their family fed) even when they really want to rest and usually without complaint or when they are in the middle of doing something else. All you have to do is feed them and they're happy (I have definitely found this to be true). They usually have hobbies, like playing sports, or in my husband's case, table top war games. They are also very straightforward and respond well to direct questions and statements. Oh wait, those are all the things that women complain about men doing. Those are the things that make men insensitive and mean and somehow like a small rodent. Women constantly attempt to change these things about men. So, they need to be men, and yet, they also need to be girls? Okay.

Then there's my favorite, the, well, "I've been hurt by a guy," statement. For whatever reason, this fact alone gives a woman the right to rag on and hate every male she ever meets unless he's a homosexual, then he's okay. I do not understand the propensity to exact vengeance from every relationship with any male simply because one man was a dirty, rottent son-of-a____. I never will. If you are just having a kneejerk reaction, all you have to do is analyze the reaction and realize that this man is not the one who hurt you, that only one man did hurt you and that, therefore, you have no right to turn your anger on every guy who gives you the time of day. Man hating is such a valid thing these days. But if a guy was hurt by a woman, then he better be ready to explain why he was actually at fault, or at least take part of the blame for what happened. He also needs to "get over it." That is the way of things, isn't it?

I will conclude by asking one question and providing a thought: in the scenario we have brought upon ourselves, who is happy? And, you do have the power to change your own attitude, nothing more.


little-cicero said...

Not bad for a "rant"

I hope you haven't been holding back such rants on the count of their being "rants" because this is exactly the sort of thing you should be writing on this blog. It was clear, eloquent, relatable and well organized- though in the most technical usage, "rant" may be appropriate.

To answer your question:

No one is happy. Women end up using their careers as surrogate husbands because no men find their attitudes attractive. Men end up using porn/masturbation as surrogate-wives because they are at the same time bombarded with fantastic images of sultry-submissive women and the reality of cold-defensive women.

little-cicero said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Angry Feminist said...

Listen "Esther", dont think we think your a woman- you only have little sissy fag fooled. Your just some male shovenist pig who likes to make women look bad. I'm onto you and your fraud blog.

Women are better than men quit spouting off about mens good qualities men are pigs- like you. Go beat your wife or something and get off the internet!

little-cicero said...

Hey- it would have been a shame to let your preparation for such a verbal assault go unused! :)

kr pdx said...

Esther: Yes. ( Mostly :). )

A set of points that needs to be more broadly considered. Condemning men for not being ideal women, when we don't even require women to be ideal women, is obnoxious and destructive.

Esther said...

LOL! LC, I knew it was you this time as soon as I read it. Very funny.

KR: Thanks! I try. Methinks I should write something less serious next as these posts are agonizingly long.

little-cicero said...

And let the record show for those who think me a homophobe, that the only time I've written the word "fag" was in describing myself!

kr pdx said...

Esther: can't say I object to lengthy writing ;).