Feminism and male aggressiveness
Aug. 23rd, 2003 02:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jayIn a separate conversation offline with a friend, I've talked about the seeming incompatibility of feminism and male assertiveness... I'm repeating some of my thoughts in my journal.
I was raised in Georgia, in the 1960s-70s... my parents taught me to be polite, to try to be considerate of others, and to try to help those in need. Combined with prevailing social attitudes and examples of schoolgirl silliness, this led me to regard girls/women my age as fragile, emotional creatures subject to exploitation by a subset of scheming males. When I went away to college, these attitudes were altered -- women could be tough and hold their own. But a 5:1 student ratio meant that they were often still badgered. I embraced feminism, in the sense that "women are people too", capable of the same accomplishments, achievements, flaws, foibles and having the same rights as males. So women were treated as intellectual equals... but I still held doors for them, as a kind of courtesy. Or just a habit.
I still felt obliged to warn and protect women in danger, as I saw it... but as a public service. The upshot was that at college social events, I saw one guy in particular who seemed to treat women as objects, disposable... he'd entice one this week, two weeks later he'd be pursuing someone else, and on amd on. He bragged about his 200+ conquests. We were in the same service fraternity. I couldn't watch the annoyed women-left-behind and not do something... so I started warning women away from him. "Watch out for X, he goes through a lot of girlfriends, uses them and leaves them." I finally confronted him personally... "how can you treat other people so shabbily? Like toys? " His response was that why not, and his partners seemed to enjoy it at the time, and those who expected commitment were just bringing in their own expectations. I was incensed. "I'll have my fun, they can take care of themselves" was not being considerate of others.
(Later, he and I became close friends, and he was actually the best man atpatgreene and I's wedding. Different story.)
My combined upbringing and feminism led me to conclude that women should be equals -- not used as toys or objects. I viewed male aggression, hitting on women, as vestigally patriarchal and boorish. IMO, relations between men and women should be coolly negotiated as equals and partners, with the given woman showing equal initiative and interest. From this viewpoint, men being assertive or dominant was tantamount to abuse, or embracing the old patriarchal system that kept women in their place. Women deserved to be equals and partners, not objects or subservient. Treated with respect, not used for one's pleasure, or groped. Men who acted in "the old ways" towards women were uneducated, were jerks, or reactionary.
If the old dominant cultural paradigm said that submissiveness was expected of women, and dominance of men.. then subvert it! Mix-and-match.
That's where I was, 10-15 years ago.
My operating theory used to be that anyone or anything which placed a woman in a submissive or passive role was being inherently abusive. And I consequently shunned being friends with any other men whom I saw acting assertively around women. Any momentary impulses I had myself in that direction were squelched.
But the theory hasn't fit reality... there appeared to be women who *enjoyed* being submissive, in a negotiated, safe set of boundaries. And men who were assertive without otherwise being a**holes. Life is yet more complicated.
But, okay, given that there exist comfortably-passive women and comfortably-dominating men, how does that correlate with personal equality? Or the interpersonal respect and consideration that is at the foundation of politeness, arguably civilization?
All I can figure thus far is that if roles and approaches are negotiated, are safe, and are freely agreed without coercion, then it isn't really submission by women, because they could choose to renegotiate or even reverse roles. It isn't "forced". Closer to role-playing. As long as it is their choice, then individual rights are being respected. And the converse would hold for men...
Still, it's a reach for me... certain protective reactions still surface when I see what appears to be exploitation or abuse of someone. It is hard to convince myself. And I still feel uneasy about being assertive towards women myself, as if to indicate interest was to make myself a threat, somehow.
I was raised in Georgia, in the 1960s-70s... my parents taught me to be polite, to try to be considerate of others, and to try to help those in need. Combined with prevailing social attitudes and examples of schoolgirl silliness, this led me to regard girls/women my age as fragile, emotional creatures subject to exploitation by a subset of scheming males. When I went away to college, these attitudes were altered -- women could be tough and hold their own. But a 5:1 student ratio meant that they were often still badgered. I embraced feminism, in the sense that "women are people too", capable of the same accomplishments, achievements, flaws, foibles and having the same rights as males. So women were treated as intellectual equals... but I still held doors for them, as a kind of courtesy. Or just a habit.
I still felt obliged to warn and protect women in danger, as I saw it... but as a public service. The upshot was that at college social events, I saw one guy in particular who seemed to treat women as objects, disposable... he'd entice one this week, two weeks later he'd be pursuing someone else, and on amd on. He bragged about his 200+ conquests. We were in the same service fraternity. I couldn't watch the annoyed women-left-behind and not do something... so I started warning women away from him. "Watch out for X, he goes through a lot of girlfriends, uses them and leaves them." I finally confronted him personally... "how can you treat other people so shabbily? Like toys? " His response was that why not, and his partners seemed to enjoy it at the time, and those who expected commitment were just bringing in their own expectations. I was incensed. "I'll have my fun, they can take care of themselves" was not being considerate of others.
(Later, he and I became close friends, and he was actually the best man at
patgreene and I's wedding. Different story.)My combined upbringing and feminism led me to conclude that women should be equals -- not used as toys or objects. I viewed male aggression, hitting on women, as vestigally patriarchal and boorish. IMO, relations between men and women should be coolly negotiated as equals and partners, with the given woman showing equal initiative and interest. From this viewpoint, men being assertive or dominant was tantamount to abuse, or embracing the old patriarchal system that kept women in their place. Women deserved to be equals and partners, not objects or subservient. Treated with respect, not used for one's pleasure, or groped. Men who acted in "the old ways" towards women were uneducated, were jerks, or reactionary.
If the old dominant cultural paradigm said that submissiveness was expected of women, and dominance of men.. then subvert it! Mix-and-match.
That's where I was, 10-15 years ago.
My operating theory used to be that anyone or anything which placed a woman in a submissive or passive role was being inherently abusive. And I consequently shunned being friends with any other men whom I saw acting assertively around women. Any momentary impulses I had myself in that direction were squelched.
But the theory hasn't fit reality... there appeared to be women who *enjoyed* being submissive, in a negotiated, safe set of boundaries. And men who were assertive without otherwise being a**holes. Life is yet more complicated.
But, okay, given that there exist comfortably-passive women and comfortably-dominating men, how does that correlate with personal equality? Or the interpersonal respect and consideration that is at the foundation of politeness, arguably civilization?
All I can figure thus far is that if roles and approaches are negotiated, are safe, and are freely agreed without coercion, then it isn't really submission by women, because they could choose to renegotiate or even reverse roles. It isn't "forced". Closer to role-playing. As long as it is their choice, then individual rights are being respected. And the converse would hold for men...
Still, it's a reach for me... certain protective reactions still surface when I see what appears to be exploitation or abuse of someone. It is hard to convince myself. And I still feel uneasy about being assertive towards women myself, as if to indicate interest was to make myself a threat, somehow.
Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-24 12:32 pm (UTC)I don't know anyone who objects to that. Male or female.
Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-24 08:22 pm (UTC)Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-24 09:41 pm (UTC)How very...something. *twitch* =/
Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-25 11:48 pm (UTC)Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-26 07:11 am (UTC)Uh. Yeah. That's exactly the word I was thinking. Well, you got the first letter right, at any rate.
Since males are often selfish and exploitative...
And lord knows no women are ever either of those things.
Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-26 11:23 pm (UTC)Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-24 10:04 pm (UTC)Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-25 11:51 pm (UTC)Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-26 07:13 am (UTC)Think that might have anything to do with the fact that you've already decided that men are worthless? Seriously, not trying to be snarky.
Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-26 11:29 pm (UTC)Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-26 02:07 pm (UTC)If you approach men with suspicion and aggression from day one, of course they're not going to behave in a way that you think of as being "worthwhile".
Re: Possessing Power -- part 1 of 2
Date: 2003-08-26 11:32 pm (UTC)People *are* complex... what changed in you to cause your expectations to change?