Arrogance: The Great Divider

Alrighty, next post, different subject. Let's talk about assholes!

Or specifically, those douche-bags who are always bragging about themselves. Just telling you how great they are. I even talked about them way back in this post.

Clay Shirky, however, gives a very interesting viewpoint on this subject. In her "A Rant About Women" (http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/01/a-rant-about-women/) she discusses the very material benefits that can come from being an arrogant braggart. I encourage you to read the whole piece, its fascinating. For now, I'll give you some of my favorite quotes:

In these circumstances, people who don’t raise their hands don’t get called on, and people who raise their hands timidly get called on less. Some of this is because assertive people get noticed more easily, but some of it is because raising your hand is itself a high-cost signal that you are willing to risk public failure in order to try something...

And it looks to me like women in general, and the women whose educations I am responsible for in particular, are often lousy at those kinds of behaviors, even when the situation calls for it. They aren’t just bad at behaving like arrogant self-aggrandizing jerks. They are bad at behaving like self-promoting narcissists, anti-social obsessives, or pompous blowhards, even a little bit, even temporarily, even when it would be in their best interests to do so. Whatever bad things you can say about those behaviors, you can’t say they are underrepresented among people who have changed the world.

Men, in her argument, often land better jobs and are more likely to take advantage of opportunities because they are comfortable with bragging about themselves.

Food for thought? Maybe. I'm going to get dinner and tell everyone how great I am.

Public vs. Private Politics

Ok, I got drunk last weekend, so I didn't post. So this week you get two posts, you lucky, lucky people.

Recently, because of this blog, I have made some feminist friends. (Yay I have a social life!) It was wonderful talking with them about our views on current culture and the continuing necessity of fighting for womens' rights. However, one thing that I noticed was that they are far, far more dedicated than I am. I, a mere dabbler in feminism, could not compare to their righteous opinions on every aspect of life. I even made some seemingly innocuous comments about the movie Avatar, which led them to jump all over my beliefs and political correctness.

Which leads me to question: where exactly do we draw the line between public beliefs and private behavior?

The most blatant example of this that I can think of happened to me in middle school. I had a close friend who has very into politics. She remains political today, and I believe is pursing a career as a senator. During the time I knew her, she championed many causes, and was always willing to argue her beliefs in person. For a school assignment, she gave an impassioned speech for the legalization of same-sex marriage.

However, those years in middle school were also the years in which it became cool to use "gay" as an insult. More specifically, people used "gay" as a synonym for "stupid". "We have extra homework? That's so gay," would be an example of the usage. I am proud to say that I never used the term in this way. This political friend though, used it constantly. Not five minutes after giving her speech, she was calling something "gay".

I believe that I was correct in considering my friend a hypocrite for this. She defended herself by saying that the "gay" slur was just slang, and would go out of fashion eventually. (Which it has, I think...thank goodness.) Nevertheless, I couldn't fathom that she would seriously support same-sex marriage, and yet allow the use of derogatory homosexual terms. She clearly did not practice what she preached.

Back to present day. I myself am often guilty of not practicing what I preach as well. I try not to use misogynist terms. I never slut-shame, as do countless people I know. But I have, for as long as I can remember, called my friends "pussies" when I think they are weak. My friend pointed out that I was equating vaginas with weakness. The thought had legitimately never occurred to me. By using this term, am I reinforcing female stereotypes? Am I helping the patriarchy?

Clearly, there is a need to live your casual, private life, as you lead your public, political life. But this leads to another quandary, for myself at least. As mentioned earlier, I was talking with my feminist friends about how much I had enjoyed the movie Avatar. They were horrified. "How can you have liked it?" They asked. "It has a horrible, untrue depiction of ableism and James Cameron is clearly a sexist. How can you support such a movie?"

Feminist often criticize such pop-culture offerings for their anti-female views. (Even Lady Gaga, a declared feminist.) I am at a loss. Am I not to enjoy my princess movies because they depict females as weak? Should I question every marriage proposal Jane Austen penned? Must I look for the politics in everything, and never enjoy any entertainment? Am I being hypocritical, and not as feminist as my angry, angry friends? I do not know if I can live life as angry as they (A common complaint against feminists...I am just digging the hole deeper today!)

I do not know. But I will try to use pussy less.

(except in this case: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BKYSt0_2cE)

Steak and a BJ

This is a post that I have wanted to do for a while. (Also I am currently procrastinating on writing an essay, and this is the perfect excuse).

In high school, one of my friends complained about her experience hooking up with a guy. They were all going at it, but she made it clear that she didn't want to have sex. The guy said something along the lines of, "Well, do you want to give me a blow job then? It could be good experience, for college." (I am not sure exactly what he said, but this is how she represented it to me - and I do believe college was a big factor in the statement.)

Anyways, my friend haughtily refused. (Obviously - get the picture guys, no blow jobs without equal reciprocation. I mean, what century do we live in?)She was especially insulted by his implication that she would need "experience" in preforming sexual favors for college. What kind of person did he think she was? Did he really think sex was all about practicing and perfecting the art?

But in reality, this is not such an uncommon belief in our society today. In a recent MailOnline article by Beth Mooney (whom I detest), the author propounds the theory that after the 70's sexual revolution "women were expected - in their love lives - to demonstrate the expertise of prostitutes." She continues: "Except these 'liberated' women gave it away for free."

In our post-sexual revolution world, women are expected to have sex! Hoo-ray! But they also have to be good at it. Quite frankly, I think the current stereotypical expectations are much more damning for the men. Men MUST BE good at sex. A guy who is lousy at sex will be ridiculed far more than a girl. Though could this have something to do with seeing a women as no more than a passive receiver of a mans glorious penis?

Don't even get me started on the gross double standards that still exist today - that a frequent sex makes a girl a ho and a man a stud (though luckily I have heard the word "man-whore" closely linked to "asshole" on my campus - unfortunately, "woman-stud" has yet to catch on.) It's a conundrum - be an excellent lay while still keeping a good reputation.

The problem I think lies in the idea of "good reputation." Women - and men - should be able to have sex - or not - and not suffer judgments on their moral character. Far fetched, I know! But things can change. Remember when pants wearing was frowned upon? Or when non-virginal brides were stoned? Things can change!

And moreover, it may be possible to redefine so called 'good' and 'bad' sex. There is a lot of talk today about all the pressures placed upon young people to lose their virginity, and become sexy, but we need to remove these sexually-revolutionized-expectations as well. Try not to make too much fun of the 40-year-old virgin - or even the 23-year-old one down the hall. People grow up in so many different cultures, in which sex can be taboo or expected. It would be nice to grow up in one in which this is a neutral. But is this even possible? My imagination, I admit, fails me. But please, Beth Mooney - lets get rid of the idea that women are losing their self-respect by following their natural instincts.

Oh Religion!

Once again, I am going to write about my discomfort. I hope this blog does not just become a list of my discomforts. "Oh, Lily was feeling awkward today! Let's write about it!" Yeah, this is what makes you a writer, people!

But no! This blog is going to be about things that I blame SOCIETY for making me feel awkward about it. And today, it is religion.

Why is it that religion is such a taboo subject? Why can't we just spout out our religious beliefs to everyone? When I do, however, I find myself losing friends. In one case, a boyfriend (he was a retrospective-crazy, no worries about that.) Anyway, I wish there was some law against this.

I don't think discussing religion is the same as converting people. I think people can have intelligent discussions on God, morals, life and after-life, without forcing others to start worshiping, or screaming "You're wrong!" at other people. In fact, I have had discussions like this, on many occasions.

However, there is something about religion that seems to get people all riled up. They just can't be civil to one another when the topic is in play. And so, it has become taboo. As much as I would love to talk about all my thoughts, its a no-no for me to do it with the world at large. I'm blaming you, society! I'm blaming you for creating all these little politeness laws and especially for creating religion!

But maybe that is what growing up is all about - learning to be confident about sharing your views, without fear of all these silly repercussions. Maybe I need to start changing to world as I see fit. I have to "be the change" like Gandhi says.

Alright, this is my little rant. I'm going to level with you - I'm not really feeling good about my views on this topic. In fact, I think a lot of my views on all topics are not well formed, and perhaps not well-supported (or even right!). But that is what this blog is for. To get a better sense of my feminism. Oh yeah, and to yell about things. I really like yelling.

Really, I love the internet:

"Rape & incest exceptionalists on abortion – This is even worse than straight anti-choice beliefs. Those can be explained in terms of believing a fetus is a full human child with all the attendant rights and privileges. If you are an exceptionalist, though, you can’t possibly believe it’s actually a child. Therefore, you just hate it when women choose to have sex and want to punish them. Well, anyone who thinks that is politely invited to eat shit and die." http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/11/12/things-to-which-i-morally-object/


Its strongly worded, but its true. I never saw the argument this way before. I always slightly commiserated with exceptionalists because I thought that at least they were on the right track. But really, making an exception means that you are just punishing a woman for making a mistake. For being stupid, one might say. And is that really a motivation for bringing a child into the world? As a punishment? "Hi Mom, I'm here to ruin your life." This is essentially the situation that an exceptionalist promotes. Disgusting.

The worst part is, that I didn't feel comfortable posting this great quote on my social sites and status updates. Not just because of the wording, but because of the content as well. I feel the need to hide certain of my political and ethical beliefs from my friends and family who might disagree. I am a coward.

But it seems like many people in America are today. I recently had a conversation with an alumni who was upset that people did not discuss politics in a civil manner anymore. Politics has become an even more taboo subject than it once was. A disagreement is usually accompanied by an immediate drop in respect.

At least I can post my thoughts here. We'll see how this continues.

Men are dispensable?

My friend told me today of a discussion he had in class on Aristotle's views in life. In class, they had interpreted a passage of Aristotle to mean that the philosopher justified a patriarchal society because men were more dispensable. In short, men could go off to war or die fighting in political discussions, but women were incredibly necessary to stay at home and bear children.

Not only did I not fully understand my friends argument (men can die and thus we give them more power? What?) but it struck me to the very core to think that anyone would try to defend a patriarchal society in this modern day and age. Aristotle, as it seems to me, was mostly interested in sticking to the status quo and explaining things already in existence. For instance, he defended slavery since he said some people were "naturally" born to be slaves. In this, I suppose women are "naturally" born to be second class citizens, mistreated and with no political power of their own.

Not only is a "dispensable" argument patently false, I see no good argument for the formation of a patriarchal society at all. If women are more necessary for the raising of children, they should be the one's in charge to ensure the future of their society. Men, with their wars, would only hinder this self-preservationist goal. Beyond that though, women should never have ceded any power in the first place. Many women make equal or better political leaders than men. Look at Golda Meir, or Queen Elizabeth. No man could have filled those roles. Within the household as well, women are often better leaders than men.

With all the arguments against patriarchy, there is no reason in this modern era to allow it to persist any further. Within our day to day lives, we must ensure to publicly and privately support a society based on gender equality for our children. (Do I sound like a woman when I talk about children? Oh well.)

The Bragging Complex

In a post by Bitch PhD, she explained how a male colleague of hers came straight out and said "I'm excellent at my job."
"Wow." She replied. "A woman would never say that."

I think this is generally true. It may be that I mix with more than my fair share of people with their heads permanently stuck up their asses, but in my estimation men brag far more about themselves than women. For every one woman I have talked to who has said something self congratulatory, I have met at least five men.
Why does this happen? Is it more socially acceptable for men to brag about themselves than women? This must be the case. No one usually chastises a man for cockiness, but women are often laughed at for their accomplishments. Often upon first meeting a man they will tell you something good about themselves. I cannot put this down to them simply trying to impress women by flirtation, for I have seen it happen between men as well. This need for self justification, for pride, is something overwhelmingly male.
Now, obviously I am painting with a broad brush here. I am not saying that there are not sufficiently modest males, or women so stuck up you want to rip their heads off. Nor do I believe this is somehow hardwired into our DNA. But the need to assert oneself, in no uncertain terms - no fishing for compliments, or false modesty - seems to me a socially taught pattern that is frequently male.