Blog 3 Feminism
I definitely agree with the viewpoints presented in Miss Representation. In some ways I feel unqualified to put in my two cents on a subject as touchy as feminism because I am a man, but at the same time I think any view supported by people for the most part excluded from the effects of that viewpoint can usually benefit from supportive input. I was not really surprised by the information presented, I am very aware of the social manipulation that is present throughout media, and some of the people that have inspired me most a outspoken feminist's.
There were a few quotes that really stood out in the film. The US being 90th internationally among countries that have women political leadership was one fact that really shocked me, I did not expect our country to be behind some of the middle eastern countries that still make women cover their face in public. I believe Gavin Newsom paraphrased it well, saying " If people knew that Cuba, China, Iraq and Afghanistan have more women in government than the united states of America, that would get some people upset." Here in the US we pride ourselves on being a free and progressive nation, yet when we look at the facts it really says that the reality is not what we think, and that women are not given fair power compared to men.
I also really liked what Nancy Pelosi said, " When I first ran for public office... Although my son was a senior in high school, the question I was most frequently asked was ' Who's going to be taking care of your children?' And of course its one of those questions that I don't think a man has ever been asked when he has run for office." This really shows the double standards we have about women being independent and given the same chances in life as a man. We tend to stereotype women as having to be the care takers at home and men as having to be the financial providers, and we rarely see deviance from those notions. I think men experience this double standard as well, when we see a stay at home dad we tend to think of him as lazy or effeminate, which is of course not always true.
One aspect of the film that really informed me on something I had not noticed about movies in our culture, was that even "chick flicks" still place the female protagonist in a roll that revolves around the winning over of the man they desire. It was one of those things that kind of slipped into my subconscious I guess, although I must admit I do not watch many "chick flicks". I'm sure this is very belittling to women because the one genre that is supposed to be their own is still littered with the ideas of what men think women want. Lisa Ling summarized this well by saying, "As a culture, women are brought up to be fundamentally insecure and always looking for the time when that knight on a horse will come and rescue us or provide for us." It seems this is prevalent in all media, even that which is supposed to be customized towards women.
All the pressure women feel about their looks and conforming to the culturally projected image has caused a lot of issues in girls and women of all ages. Eating disorders are much higher among women than they are among men. Plastic surgery is also much more common for women. This idea of what they must look like in order to be attractive is bordering on complete plasticity, and is a sad simulacrum of Barbie dolls being emulated among people that gave up their dolls long ago. The type of toys we give to children can also be revealing of this embedded idea of each genders role in our world. Boys are given action figures and construction toys, will girls are given dolls that emphasize being a mother, dressing pretty, and taking care of the house. The ideas we have about proper roles has caused us to reinforce them among our children at an early age, making the cycle that much harder to break.
Luckily there is a growing awareness of this issue, especially the concern over women holding prominent political positions. According to crikey.com in an article titled: " Sexism is bad for your health", Australia is launching a new campaign against sexism which was sparked by the prime ministers speech. " The Australian Prime Minister’s recent ‘misogyny’ speech gave voice to the issue which was an important step. Interestingly the media coverage of this speech in Australia was more focused on the political ramifications of the speech than its content; it wasn't really until it got coverage in countries like the UK and USA that the Australian media began to talk about the real issues which women in leadership face.....There are important reasons beyond those of equity to ensure women are better represented in leadership positions. Companies with higher rates of women on their boards perform better and improve their risk profile. Female Senators in the US Congress outperform their colleagues on their ability to raise more funds for constituents and achieve a higher rate of sponsorship for their legislation." I think it is important to highlight such facts as women being able to raise more funds and having greater success lobbying. Perhaps men of wealth and power will recognize this and start to better utilize women in key positions of powers.
Now, a few people found effect with that "USA-90th" statistic and wrote about it in their blogs too. It does make the US sound bad by comparison, especially compared to Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba and all those other places that are apparently ranked higher than the US. Normally, I would find that statistic disturbing, but I don't have any feelings regarding it or in reaction to it at all. I say this for a few reasons, well, one in particular: there is too much we (or, at least I) do not know. Where did that statistic come from and who ran the study to find that information? Are they reputable? How many women in America have actually applied for places in government, or even want to? And dealing with those other countries that apparently ranked higher than the US: what positions do women hold in their governments and how did they get those positions? Are they actually in power, or do they just clean the offices (that's not meant to be sexist or anything, but I'm sure you get my point)? There is just too much we (again, or at least I) don't know. (I don't know, maybe you all know the answers to all those questions, but I sure don't)
ReplyDeleteBefore I ever establish feelings on a topic or something, I wait until I hear both points of view, both sides of the story. That way I keep an open mind, understand everything, and have justified feelings accordingly.
Rob,
ReplyDeleteYou write, "I feel unqualified to put in my two cents on a subject as touchy as feminism because I am a man." I hope you won't continue to feel this way as being male doesn't disqualify you or diminish your perspective at all. So. Onward.
You write, "We tend to stereotype women as having to be the care takers at home and men as having to be the financial providers, and we rarely see deviance from those notions." I think the stereotype are there, but I think there's also a lot of "real-life" deviance from these roles - the number of stay-at-home dads is steadily rising,the number of women pursuing the dual roles of wife/mother and career/job continues to rise, etc. (You can find various statistics that don't quite match number-wise, but they do show that the number of women who stay at home full-time is much smaller than a lot of people assume. A Gallup poll (typically fairly reliable) suggests that only 14% of women who have at least one child at home under 18 aren't formally employed.
The poll states, "According to Gallup Daily tracking interviews with more than 45,000 U.S. adult women, aged 18 and older, between Jan. 2 and March 31, 63% of women with children under 18 in the home are employed -- representing 24% of all women. The remaining 37% of mothers of children under 18 are not employed -- the aforementioned 14% who are stay-at-home moms. Thus, speaking to Rosen's comments, more mothers of children indeed work outside the home than don't work outside the home" (http://www.gallup.com/poll/153995/stay-home-moms-lean-independent-lower-income.aspx). Now, these stats are roughly a year old, but I found them surprising - I knew the number of stay-at-home moms was actually fairly small (across a whole host of demographics), but even I found this number surprising.
You write, " It seems this is prevalent in all media, even that which is supposed to be customized towards women." Not sure what you mean - the MEDIA is supposed to be customized? Something else?
You write, "All the pressure women feel about their looks and conforming to the culturally projected image has caused a lot of issues in girls and women of all ages. Eating disorders are much higher among women than they are among men. Plastic surgery is also much more common for women. This idea of what they must look like in order to be attractive is bordering on complete plasticity." These things are all true, all facts, but also ones that encompass the surface of the discussion. I think you could dig a bit deeper into these statements. That said,
I like the example you chose about the Australian campaign -- I've heard just a bit about this so far. You DO ask some good, critical questions about this, and I love your point about how the campaign - and the way we talk about it - changed when it came to the states.
Charles,
ReplyDeleteYou, too, ask some very good questions. You should always question statistics - they never exist in a vacuum, and they can be presented in various ways, of course. As such, they always need context. To be fair, any documentary (or other form of media) is going to use stats to its own advantage, just as do politicians and/or anyone who wishes to paint numbers in a certain light.