gender roles – thoughts on radical feminism part 2
on the planet Obstreperon, where patriarchy was abolished centuries ago following the Spinster Aunt Rebellion of 3658, “male” and “female” are quaint anachronisms, recollected only dimly by the creakiest and wispiest of superannuated crones who in their innocent youth were told frightening tales by their frail grannies about anti-abortion legislation, plastic surgery, pornography, and the horrid olden days before uterusbots liberated the sex class. Since on the planet Obstreperon there is no sex-based oppression context within which to define femininity, the word has no meaning and the behavior does not exist. (iblamethepatriarchy.com)
I find some aspects of the discussions around gender identity within radical feminist circles a bit odd. Suggestions that there are no underlying gender differences, and that both females and males are simply complying with the constructs of oppressive-with-intent behavioural norms, seem to be grounded in limited personal experience (from moving in circles of similar people) and wishful thinking.
Interestingly enough, before I spent serious amounts of time with babies and children, I was happy to believe the same thing. If I hadn’t had babies who fell plunk in the average gender-based development milestones, in such basic areas as communication and movement, and if I hadn’t hung around with parents whose babies did similar things (not all, not all) I might well still be making that assumption. If I hadn’t read studies of other cultures and other species confirming these kind of general differences are fairly universal to all animals (although sometimes in reverse to our expectations), I might still be doubting what I’d seen with my own eyes in humans.
However, while acknowledging key gender characteristics can broadly fall across sex groups, I’m more than happy for so-called gender roles to be worked over and for everyone to be given free rein to pursue whatever they find interesting, whatever makes them happy, without feeling the pressure of gender expectation, the pain of ridicule, or the barriers that come from closed-thinking. This is a work in progress for society and I salute radical feminists who doggedly pursue it.
The thing is, I’m not entirely clear how we achieve it, given what we know about natural human behaviour.
People look for role models, people moved in herds of similar. Children all over the world from around the age of three start to identify with other kids they view as similar, and start to put people in boxes of ‘like me’ and ‘not like me’. We can take positive steps to minimise these boxes, but cries of ‘I don’t want to play with boys because they’re stupid’ (they can’t express themselves as clearly, they bomb around knocking people over, they don’t understand social cues to the same degree etc) and ‘I don’t want to play with girls because they’re stupid’ (they don’t join in the fun games bombing around, they’re bossy and talk too much or sit boringly in the corner playing with quiet toys etc’) for the majority of children are fairly common. And for those for whom these boxes don’t come as naturally, they hear the other kids saying it, so many will parrot it, and before you know, may actually believe it too.
Obviously, obviously, this description doesn’t fit all kids – it’s the general pattern of average hormone impact on middle distribution kids. Individuals are all over the place on any given characteristic, and that’s why it’s important not to pressurise children into any specific role (any more than they naturally pressurise each other …)
So, for me, what radical feminists are often pushing for, this seeming utopia of the genderless society, sounds a bit like yet another artificially engineered new world order with unknown repercussions. What would a world look like where we consciously try to obliterate the natural mimicking and grouping instincts of all children? How do we tread the delicate line between not continuing to propagate the admittedly harmful pressures of suppositional gender identity in a gender-biased society, with not over-writing the norms generated by gender-specific hormones and the herding instinct of a gender group divide?
Frankly, I have no idea.
But, one area I am quite clear on, is that our individual sense of what aspects of gender are pure construct need not coincide with the experiences of others, and what feels innately natural to them. I would encourage anyone attracted to the general radical feminist view on this issue to consider that their personal experience of gender roles, and their individual response to how they wish to subvert what is the current norm, cannot be used as a stick to beat anyone else who, for whatever reason, wants to express themselves according to what is considered ‘stereotypical’.
We cannot say on one hand that everyone should be free to express themselves as they wish, and on the other hand insist “but not like that!”. If we do, we become as mindlessly prescriptive as the patriarchal norm we seek to change.
More of my thoughts on gender roles can be found on these posts:
misleading discussions about generic gender roles
caught in the middle – are gender differences real?
The radical feminist answer to the gender differences in children is that they are because of conditioning. We call babies “Princess” or “Big Strong Boy”. We hold them differently, speak to them differently, even when goo-gooing at them so they can hear the basic sounds of the language.
LikeLike
Yes, it sounds plausible until you have a baby of your own. The differences are too big, too surprising, even to people planning to be gender neutral. Also, I think you only need a casual glance at every other species on the planet to know that gender differences broadly correlate with sex organs. Did you have a look at this article I linked to?
http://www.parenting.com/article/real-difference-between-boys-and-girls
LikeLike
I am male, and I am feminist. I have lately been exploring the topic of gender roles. Since I benefit from male privilege, I try to keep my feminism in a supportive rather than prescriptive mode. I don’t feel I am in a position to determine the correct direction of feminism nor the ways that individual women should feel about feminism. I appreciate and agree with your conclusion. We are not all the same. Being different is normal. So let’s normalize being different.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, you’ve swallowed the text book and know what’s expected of you! I benefit from loads of privilege in loads of areas – I still want to thrust my opinion down everyone’s throats. I clearly haven’t worked my way effectively through this whole ‘privilege’ buzzword and everything it entails. It kind of makes me cringe, but I know there’s a lot in it.
LikeLike
There may be hope for you yet, Violet. 😉
I have some respect for Twisty, at least she is brave enough to follow things to their logical conclusion. Kind of funny, I once got in heated debate with her over the way girls, women,are natural born scientists. We are, whether it be biology within our own bodies, psychology with the kids, or chemistry in the kitchen. Educated or not, women have been practicing science for centuries. And also art and music and culture.
In a somewhat amusing flip, it was Twisty and some rad fems who declared that no, if it wasn’t patriarchal science, educated and practiced under a male dominated system, it didn’t really count as “real science.” What makes something real, valid, legit? If it is defined and approved of by the patriarchy…and valued by men. Well, like it or not, this desire to be seen and valued by men is pretty innate to women…. even to the radical lesbian separatists. There’s nothing wrong with that, but what is wrong is to deny that truth and to than attempt to shame women who embrace it.
I had some great debates over there.
LikeLike
“There may be hope for you yet, Violet.”
That’s a cause for concern if ever I saw one. Of even more concern is that I kind of get what you mean about traditional male activities being seen as the important, serious, useful ones.
You lose me, again, when you suggest that every woman wants to be valued by men. I remember you making that claim once before, when I was breastfeeding, and thinking what utter nonsense it was. I’ve realised since I moved out of the pregnancy/breastfeeding stage and the hormones have kicked back in, that part of me does want to be valued by men (it makes me shudder to admit it). But, and this is a big but, it does invalidate your claim. We all have different hormones, mine have come and gone for various reasons at various points in my life, some women will genuinely never have felt like that, some women may only experience it mildly for a short spell in their life etc. Not all women want to be valued by men. Like everything else, you can’t take your experience and try and paint the world with it.
And, although there may be nothing wrong with it, nothing to shame people with, it is patently ridiculous. It’s just an animal wanting to breed, sending out signals. Please don’t read so much into it, and put your pillar-box lipstick away. 🙂
LikeLike
Pingback: Women’s oppression | Clare Flourish
Pingback: rigid gender roles and comedic farce | See, there's this thing called biology...
Hey viole twisp
From your link below, and the natural selection of truck/dolls etc, it says this:
—And while 18 months is old enough to have been influenced by stereotyped gifts, research suggests that many of the differences we see are evident from birth, and may even be hardwired. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to gender research.—
So, your ‘gender neutral’ in this context means what? HARDWIRED? Hmm. Kinda sorta sounds like ‘male and female created He them…………..’ just sayin.
LikeLike
Did you read the post ColorStorm? A stereotype, or average distribution, isn’t universal, it’s just a trend that the majority, or large numbers fall into. Try and read the post again and engage your furry head. 🙂
LikeLike
I quoted word for word your link Violet. And the implication is obvious that ‘boys and girls’ are wired differently.
Only, difference, I gave salute to the Master Electrician who knows all about source, code, and subsequent behaviour.
In a world of absolutes, it all begins ‘in the beginning…..’
LikeLike
Sorry V, I fail to see how how a child is influenced by merely selecting one over another. Ha, some may even call that natural selection. And I would go further, not really off topic, and say that both genders, regardless of age, learn early and often how to lie and steal without input,
Any doubts should be quickly dispelled by anybody with children.
LikeLike
Males and females tend to be certain ways, but research shows us that there is more variety within the two groups than there are differences between them.
LikeLike
I’m not sure how to tread the line between identifying the problems that our gender stereotyping brings, and minimising the reality of the general differences that exist. Yes, we are all a unique blend of characteristics that come from both sides, but it seems foolish to deny that there are broad differences. Beyond that, I see this negation of this obvious fact being used to tell trans people they are damaging feminism.
LikeLike
What exactly do you see as the broad differences? And how sure are you that the differences you see are not simply a matter of socialization?
LikeLike