Any color so long as it’s black.
Published by violet July 24th, 2008 in Punkass!, Feminism, Bodily Autonomy, Human Rights, CultureJust a bit back, Lisa has this neat/infuriating post on how women are functionally censured no matter what choice we make with respect to childbearing (and, of course, many other things).
She concludes, wondering,
Why, in a country purportedly founded upon the rights of the individual to choose any number of things–why we have created a situation where doing so is overwhelmingly disapproved of, a situation where the only fix in terms of general societal approval would be to remove entirely that right..?
I think it’s because we… don’t. We as a society don’t genuinely value individual choices, desires, and responsibility. We don’t like agency, and we don’t like individuals to have actual power to affect change. We like to say we do, though, because we can leverage that narrative of free choice to legitimize our institutions. “See,” we might say, “women don’t actually want access to employment and equal pay, for when completely free of coercion of any kind, they choose to stay at home and have kids.” Or we might say, “Look, those poor blacks / immigrants / white trash wouldn’t be poor if they didn’t choose to live that way.” Or perhaps, “Fattie fattie fattie stop choosing to be fat fat fat.”
The thing is: if you hold a gun to someone’s head and say, “Believe this. Do this. Live like I tell you to,” you lose a certain amount of authority to claim that your way is superior to any other. Shallow Nietzschen ethics aside, we have some intuition that “because otherwise I will shoot you,” is not an argument that supports, “society should be structured like this.” We aren’t, in short, interested in a free, liberated society because such a thing is valuable for its own sake. We are interested in a free, liberated society—or at least the appearance of one”because it supports our ideology. Because then we can say, “hey, whatever your qualms, with it people freely choose to support a white-supremacist capitalist patriarchy,” as if such a thing were even possible.
So first of all, this is why it’s important to make individuals responsible for every single negative thing that has happened to them—if not directly, then situationally, in that they have failed to choose to overcome the same adversity that everyone else obviously does. Mockery, derision, and distilled shame are the only effective medicines.
It’s also particularly evident when we decide to—what’s the euphemism? “Export colonialism?” “Engage in neo-democracy?” Something like that, anyway. Especially when the state we’re trying to build isn’t particularly popular with anyone, y’know, living there, maintaining the illusion that this is Exactly What They All Want is crucial.
This is also why we like innovative! entrepreneurial! driven! straight! white! men! who are rebels! bucking the system! by making money and exploiting others in a very slightly novel way. We particularly like IEDSWMWARBTS when they aren’t technically straight, white, or men—after all, Oprah shows us that any black woman can attain incredible wealth, fame, and power, since, see, one has!
In all of these cases, it is completely acceptable and desirable for anyone and everyone to passionately pursue their desires and boldly make individual statements and choices, so long as those choices support and reify patriarchal power structures. Women choosing their career over their children are obviously heartless and demonstrate the need for men to help them make the right choice; women choosing their children over their careers obviously demonstrate that feminism did no good for anybody; women insisting that the choice is a false dichotomy and working against to support their carers and family are, sadly, simply unrealistic.
And God help you if you’re a childless lesbian (tragic), a lesbian with kids (gross!), or a single lesbian (metaphysically impossible).
Omg. That is the why.
Thank you.
Thank you! I’ve been saying this for a while but my family/friends mostly think I should stop whinging.
An instant hit, punkass blogger violet. You’ve nailed the why precisely.
Women don’t have sole propriety over being berated for their lifestyle choices. They actually have more choices (societally speaking) than men do, and behind each of those choices is a small group of supporters.
Men have really one choice: work long hours in order to bring home lots of money to your family. Anything outside of that - dad staying home with the kids while mom works, remaining single long into adulthood, remaining single *and* not seeking to bring lots of money home - all those choices are pretty universally looked down upon.
Now, this isn’t a “oh, but you don’t have it as bad as me” counterpoint. The original point was that women have it hard when it comes to choices; presumably when compared to men. Men have it hard too, just as hard, which makes the original point silly.
All people have it hard when it comes to deciding how to live their lives. No matter what choice you make, man or woman, the majority of society is going to think you’re wrong.
This libertarian agrees completely with your point on the illusion of choice. I have often been told that I shouldn’t complain about the system because it just so happens in this country I can supposedly vote and have some say. I say this whole thing was rigged. And I’m not even a woman.
Nougat, you’re forgetting society’s double-standards in favor of men. It’s true that men get judged too, no matter what choices they make. But that judgment is often quite light in comparison, or given with a sly wink and a nod saying “sure it’s bad, but what can you do, boys will be boys!”
By the way, violet, this is my favorite of your posts here yet.
Dear Nougat
“Universally looked down upon.”
Really? I know guys in their 30’s not married with no kids, but no one asks what is wrong with them. Heck, I am one of them. No one tries to coerce me in any way. As a matter of fact I have been called smart for waiting and responsible. I doubt a woman would receive the same praise.
I know guys who are UPS drivers, construction workers, and so on who I doubt anyone would say are “seeking to bring lots of money home”. They are seeking to just get by and society has no problem with that. I have never heard one of them called a bad name, or told by someone “wow, you are just messing up your life.” Heck their country music songs tell them it is a good thing to be a simple working man.
“No matter what choice you make, man or woman, the majority of society is going to think you’re wrong.”
If I choose to make a baby with my wife and work, you know that whole American Dream thing, what “majority” has a problem with that? But of course I think that is the whole point, the coercion toward what those in power would like us to be.
Nougat, the illusion of choice applies to men. It just applies to them differently, and it wasn’t my focus. Men who are seen as actively rejecting the (increasingly lexically unwieldy) IEDSWMWARBTS role are censured—particularly if they adopt more traditionally feminine stances and roles (i.e. staying home and caring for the kids, having traditionally feminine occupations like secretaries and teachers).
In the particular case of reproductive freedom and large life choices, it’s difficult to see how men’s choices are just as devalued as women’s. Men can choose not to get married, they can choose not to have families, they can choose to have a string of girlfriends 40 years their junior, and none of these draw particular notice. Perhaps the last one is a bit notable, but who’s at fault there? Of course, it’s the younger woman, who is clearly a gold digger. (If you flip the couple’s genders, the older woman becomes a sexually predatory cougar. Brilliant!)
To be clear, I don’t precisely think this is because we suddenly have a genuine love for individuality when men are concerned; I think this attitude occurs because our cultural narrative values men as individuals capable of action, and women as accessories at best. Supporting this narrative requires that we’re be more supportive of men’s choices, even weakly: “oh, well, boys will be boys.”
In other words, what Quin and Synikal said. :p