Not Bad for a Girl

While overt sexism still rears its ugly head, much of it these days seems to be the subtler, more pernicious type. Many sexist remarks start innocently enough. In fact, one might even think she was being offered a compliment until she really thinks about what the speaker said or how he/she said it. Whatever the case is, sexism is damaging.

The blog Stop Sexist Remarks is seeking advice and words of wisdom about stopping sexist remarks from female and male readers, but in the meantime, offers three tips:

1. Change your own behavior. Listen to how you think and speak about women and men—pay attention to the times when you find yourself thinking or saying, “Oh that’s just like a woman (or a man),” or any variation on that theme. You might be surprised how often each of us actually thinks or makes statements about women and men that are based on old values that do not reflect our desire to create a culture of gender equality. Begin to filter out thoughts and stop using phrases that are not based on fact and do not promote gender equality.

2. Talk with your family about sexist remarks. Select a time to talk about the importance of stopping sexist remarks—whether it is in response to something you hear on television or to a sexist comment made in front of your children. Use these times to help your family define how they feel about gender equality and the role they want to play in promoting it during everyday conversations.

3. Talk about the need to stop sexist remarks in the culture with someone new whenever an appropriate opportunity presents itself. Decide this year to talk to your friends, neighbors, and colleagues about the need to respond to sexist remarks in your daily lives. When a sexist comment is made, whether on the news, in the cul-de-sac, or at a local sporting event, choose one of the other people involved to discuss what happened, how you felt about it, and why it would be helpful to begin to jointly respond to sexist comments. Be sure to try this in environments that are appropriate (safe) for you and with people you believe would be interested and supportive. Begin building coalitions in your life for addressing remarks that diminish women.

I'd like to riff off of the first point and add that this includes sexist remarks that are supposedly positive, such as, "If more women were in charge of financial institutions, we never would have found ourselves in an economic crisis since women don't take testosterone-fueled risks," or, "If more women were elected to office, there would be no corruption." These types of comments - which I see all the time from both feminists and people who say they oppose feminism - drive me up up the wall. Women are people, too. People have the same unfortunate power-grabbing, ego-enhancing, and greedy instincts, regardless of their genitalia. Some may indulge these negative traits more than others, and cultural bias and social training may encourage people to exhibit certain traits more than others, but at the end of the day, we all have them. It is sexist to insist that women are inherently more moral than men. (And it's even worse to insist that mothers are more gentle and nurturing than any one else on the planet. Please!!! I've seen many, many women do horrid things to other people so that they can insure that their children benefit the most and stay ahead of the pack. I'm not criticizing it; it is only human to want the best for your kid, and not everyone takes the positive road to making sure that happens.)

It turns out that my crotchety criticism of sexism masked as kind remarks or helpful comments has an actual definition: benevolent sexism. According to Human Heuristics, a study found that benevolent sexism affects women's performances more than hostile sexism:

However, in the benevolent condition there was not a perception of sexism, per se, whereas in the hostile condition there was. So when women confront hostile sexism, they can identify it as sexism, writing it off as a flaw of the one writing the job description. When they confront benevolent sexism, it is difficult to attribute sexism because it is less straight-forward and may be masked among pleasantries or praise.

The authors argue that being unable to identify the sexism and attribute the perceived unpleasantness to it leads to an ambiguous situation which is harder to deal with. This may preoccupy the mind, causing subsequent worse performance on the tasks used to test for the job training. The cognitive load keeps the mind busy in the case of benevolent sexism, whereas with hostile sexism, the sexism can be identified and some method of coping instituted, so performance does not suffer.

Other good old fashioned sexist concepts that makes me want to poke eyes out (often my own, so I don't have to witness these types of things any more, but often the speaker's eyes as well) is the maxim "women and children first" and the idea that it is somehow wrong to kill or maim "women and children" during warfare but not civilian men. From day one this concept has been screwed up because once you saved the woman, society gave her no means to care for her children and herself, so what was the point? In today's terms, I hate the phrase because it unintentionally treats women as children: innocent, harmless, and incapable of defending oneself. After the crash of USAir Flight 1549 into the frigid Hudson River this past January, a healthy debate arose regarding the policy of women and children first. Jeanne Sager at Strollerderby wrote:

...there has to be some organizational basis for getting people moved from here to there, and few would argue with a child's right to be cut the line in light of a tragedy. Children first, at least, is almost irrefutable. They still have a chance at a life. They still have time left to make a difference.

But... kids need caregivers when they're rescued. And last I checked, caregivers come in all forms - daddies too. So what happens when we stick to "women and children first?" If a child is traveling with their Dad in tow, is the screaming tot ripped from his arms and thrust into those of a stranger, wriggling and crying? ... Perhaps the more appropriate choice is children - with appropriate caregiver - first, to be followed by whomever the pilot and his crew thinks can be gotten to next in the most organized fashion?

Hear, hear! Sager's logic is impeccable! Or at least, not bad for a girl....

Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in NYC.