So the biggest thing that happened to me this year, the biggest that might ever happen, was figuring out (for myself at least) exactly what the “dominant paradigm” we used to talk about subverting might really be. I had little glimmerings about it, and then it just sort of poured out this summer, and ever since then my posts have been far more purposeful and, sorry to say, quite a bit less erotic.
So it’s kind of fitting that today, on the last day of this memorable-for-me year, that I’d read just a marvelous, affirming chapter in a 37 year old book.
I mentioned back in September that it looked like Germaine Greer might have anticipated my idea back in 1970 in The Female Eunuch
How about her chapter called Puberty then? She fiercely lays out her side, women’s side, of the conundrum…
...all that we are constantly aware of is that puberty is hell. It is hell for boys as well as girls, but for boys it is a matter of adjusting to physical changes which signify the presence of sex and genitality… For the girl it is a different matter: she has to arrive at the feminine posture of passivity and sexlessness. No sooner does her public hair appear than she has to learn how to obliterate it. Menstruation must be born and belied. She has been so protected from accepting her body as sexual that her menstruation strikes her as a hideous violation of her physical integrity.
...
The growing girl is encouraged to use her feminine charm, to be coy and alluring, while ignoring the real theatre [i.e. sexuality] in which such blandishments operate.
...
In this critical period a girl is expected to begin her dealings with men, dealings based upon her attractiveness as a sexual object, dealings which can only be hampered by any consideration of her own sexual urge.
One more quick quote that I needed to read a couple of times before I recognized that she isn’t simply regurgitating a common put-down of women who “put out” to be popular (it’s in the final clause.)
It is not uncommon for a girl seeking ‘popularity’ or approbation from boys to allow boys to take extraordinary liberties with her, while neither seeking nor deriving anything for herself.
In other words, says Greer, puberty is a particular kind of hell for girls because that is the time that, first, they become present to “sex and genitality,” and second, that, unlike boys, this is taken away from them so that, to be “normal” and “well adjusted” they must become female eunuchs.
So that’s Greer’s side — the consequences of what I’m calling men’s dominant paradigm of women as the “no-sex” class. Unlike Greer, however, who focused so much on the aftermath, what I’ve been trying to plumb is the origins of the thing. And it’s consequences for men. Which, as I occasionally hint is of a deeper and more souls-conquering nature than the routine carping about “getting drafted” or “having more heart attacks” or just generally being “more expendable than women.”
Submitted by 1848 (not verified) on Tue, 2008-01-01 19:34.
"I can't speak to the experience of all women, but I can tell you from my own experience that a first period is celebrated as a "woo hoo! I am growing up" moment for many girls. "
Really? No one I know describes it this way. But that might be just me, because I pretty much hated everything about my period for the first decade, and was in denial about having already reached puberty for a good year or so.
"I gave up on "popular" in about 5th grade."
Yeah, me too. However that didn't stop me from not feeling self-conscious about my already B cup breasts. Nor from gendered teasing.
"Is it important to convince people to change their tastes? I don't think so."
I'd also like to point out the straw feminist in this. Most feminist discourse on leg shaving that I've ever been a part of centers around trying to separate out the cultural pressure from personal wants, and how to make it easier for women to do what they truly want, not in prescribing a certain behavior for every woman. The conversation tends to get a bit vocal about the cultural pressure, because that's the response that's needed to balance out that same pressure, and us spinster aunts can be a bit impatient with newbies that pretend culture doesn't influence them at all lalalalala....but it's hardly that feminists as a rule think it's imperative to get people to change their tastes - as opposed to simply examine their choices.
"About teenagers and sex, I can tell you from my own experience (for what it is worth) that girls talk about sex a lot ..."
Well, yes, as anyone whose ever had the job of cleaning up the teen mag section of the local bookstore/supermarket can tell you.
The distinction that both feminists (and, I believe, figleaf as well) are trying to make is that while women and girls talk amongst themselves about sex a lot and even (gasp!) enjoy it, the idea that women enjoy sex isn't really part of the public discourse. (Sex in the City notwithstanding. There is a reason, after all, that it was considered so "shocking!") And this does tend to make it harder for everyone to enjoy sex.
"I think that one of the differences is that girls too often equate sex with love..."
I think one of the reasons they do this (more than boys, I mean, it's a pretty natural teen response) is because while girls talk about sex amongst themselves, the public constantly denounces sexual desire in teen girls and tells that "normal" girls want love, not sex - so sexual desire gets confused with love rather than connected to it. Likewise, boys are taught that "normal" boys only care about teh sex and that only "pussies" talk about love. So they bury their feelings and/or confuse love (or the need for affection) with sexual desire.
ps, figleaf, if you are ever looking for a good book to tear apart, may I suggest Boys Will Put You On A Pedestal: So They Can Look Up Your Skirt? It's just positively awful, and has lots of examples of the Dad not only reinforcing the idea that girls don't really want sex, but that sex is pretty much all boys want.
[Since it looks like this topic gets a little heated further down I'd like to take a moment to point out that a lot of these issues can vary quite a bit even from neighborhood to neighborhood or school clique to clique *and* that I don't think are broadly surveyed. The result can be that we *all* need to be careful not to extrapolate our local experience much past, well, our personal experience. For instance my experience of my neighborhood, which has a ton of stay-at-home fathers, wouldn't be a good basis for statements about the nation as a whole. (Although it is a good neighborhood to point to as an example of how domestic arrangements *could work very nicely.* That said, Mickle, I strongly support almost everything you say, and appreciate the recognition you offered. Thanks. --fl]
Submitted by 1848 (not verified) on Wed, 2008-01-02 08:50.
No, I am not making it up. When I got my first period I was excited about it. Sort of like losing my first tooth when I was 6. I have always liked being a girl and I was very excited about becoming a woman-having breasts and pubic hair and all of that. I was not embarrassed, I was proud. I had a group of friends who felt that way, too. We were not the prettiest or most popular girls, but we were probably oversexed, and by that I mean that what we were doing at 14 and 15 (engaging in what I think of now as adult relationships) was not healthy, because we were not ready for sex, but we thought we were. I also don't mean to say that life was so great then because the middle school years pretty much sucked. Being 13 is just plain hard. Oh, and back to menstruation...I did not ever feel that I hated having periods, sure it is messy and inconvenient but for me it has always been sort of reassuring. At some times in my life it was reassuring to know I was not pregnant and now it is a reassuring sign that I am still healthy and nowhere near menopause. Sure, red blood on white pants is not a good look, but otherwise I have never thought it was gross or been embarrassed as long as I was not leaking, which is a little embarrassing. Also, when I was about 15, I had a friend who was older than me who was an important influence on my life, and she taught me about the sacred feminine and Goddess spirituality and so because of that I feel spiritual about menstruation. I do not represent every woman, just me. Some of the things that Greer says don't sit well with me or strike me as true (although I have not read Female Eunuch but I will). I think for one thing, it is important to consider what she wrote in the context of when and where she wrote it. I also wonder if my experience was different from what she described BECAUSE of what she wrote and her influence on our culture. I am sure my Goddess worshiping mentor was influenced by Greer.
Ok, about leg shaving...I don't appreciate it that you called my opinion a "straw feminist" position. According to Wikipedia, "A 'straw man' argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. Often, the straw man is set up to deliberately overstate the opponent's position." Are you saying that you are a feminist and I am not? Are you saying that I am an opponent of feminism? You wrote, "Most feminist discourse on leg shaving that I've ever been a part of centers around trying to separate out the cultural pressure from personal wants..." I personally believe that everything we do is influenced by culture, and I don't care about what other feminists say about leg shaving because I can think for myself. I think leg shaving is unnecessary, but some women I know in real life feel sexy when their legs are shaved, so fine. It's their choice. I don't care if women shave their legs and I think that other issues are far more important. I have always thought of myself as a feminist because I believe in equal opportunity for women. That does not mean I have to agree with everything that other women who also call themselves feminists say.
About teenage girls talking about sex, you wrote, "Well, yes, as anyone whose ever had the job of cleaning up the teen mag section of the local bookstore/supermarket can tell you." What I heard was, "well duh!" with the implication that what I said was obvious and that I misunderstood the point. I will never claim to be brilliant and sometimes my comments are not all that well thought out, but I would like to participate in this conversation without being "duhd." Sorry, but I am feeling a bit defensive. One of the things that I appreciate about Figleaf is that he creates a safe place to comment by very kindly saying, "Thanks, Mag" even when I am sure he has sometimes thought that what I said was obvious or wrong.
And I do understand the whole thing about how good girls are not supposed to want sex and are uncomfortable with their bodies while men and boys are beasts who can't help but want sex all the time. No I don't think that paradigm is good for anyone but I do see change on the horizon.
Submitted by 1848 (not verified) on Tue, 2008-01-01 02:55.
She fiercely lays out *her* side, women's side
I think this lays out, pretty clearly, why I will forever be a girl and never a woman. 'Cause I can't relate to this. AT ALL. I think being an outcast geek is like a whole different universe. I gave up on "popular" in about 5th grade. It's amazing how many of these so-called "rules" no longer apply when "popular" is anathema.
[I'll just say it was *way* harder to be able to ditch those rules today than it was when Greer wrote them. But yeah, when you look at her analysis it's just an open invitation to blow "popular" off. Thanks, Plymouth. --fl]
Submitted by 1848 (not verified) on Tue, 2008-01-01 05:49.
I guess something that we're working towards now is that it is also hellish for boys, because on becoming 'present to "sex and genitality"' the exact diametric opposite occurs. Rather than having it taken away, it is rigorously enforced by social expectation, and the boy becomes identified only with his sex drive and little else. On the face of it, that looks like fun, and is experienced that way by some, but the competition with other boys to prove oneself to be identified with sex in particular, is endless and impossible to satisfy.
The result is that puberty (and often at some point before puberty) results in an alienation of sexuality from people: for men, it becomes something in antagonism to us that is controlling of us and takes the place of our true identity. The work on how women stand in relation to sex and sexuality shows clearly how the alienation works there.
I did my own personal observations of this here.
["...Rather than having it taken away, it is rigorously enforced..." Yeah, if you're in the no-sex class it's cut off from you, if you're in the sex class it's shoved down your throat... or pants or something. Thanks, SE. --fl]
Submitted by 1848 (not verified) on Tue, 2008-01-01 09:35.
I think that one of the short comings of Greer is that she has a tendency to say that her own experience (she was born in 1939 in Australia) is the experience of all women, which, to be kind, is a stretch. I have not read The Female Eunuch, but from what you have written, I wonder if the experience it describes is relevant for understanding the experiences of girls who are growing up today.
I can't speak to the experience of all women, but I can tell you from my own experience that a first period is celebrated as a "woo hoo! I am growing up" moment for many girls. Shaving of pubic hair has always freaked me out because I think it makes women look like little girls and I have always wondered if men who are into that are closet pedophiles, but maybe I am wrong. I sort of feel that way about leg shaving, too, but the reason I don't shave my own legs is because the hair on my legs is thin and blond, so I am practically hairless anyway. If I had thick dark hair on my legs, I might feel differently and I think that no one should tell women that they should not shave their legs if they like doing it, and I know that many women do feel better if their legs are shaved. Is this cultural? Of course it is. Is it important to convince people to change their tastes? I don't think so.
About teenagers and sex, I can tell you from my own experience (for what it is worth) that girls talk about sex a lot and one of the reasons why some girls have sex before they are ready is because all of their friends say they are doing it, which is also at least sometimes apparently true for boys. So in many ways I think that teenage girls and boys have similar experiences, at least sometimes, at this point in history in some places (hows that for a qualified statement?). I think that one of the differences is that girls too often equate sex with love, and romanticizing virginity as a gift like in that billboard you wrote about a few days ago doesn't help with that thinking. I love that readiness for sex checklist in Scarleteen. I wish I had had a resource like that when I was a teenager.
This is not to discount what you have written about the sex class/no sex class paradigm, because I do think there is still a lot of truth to it, but I do think the times they are a'changin', and I hope it is for the better. I do think that people have more choices and more information than we did before.
[One piece of evidence that times are changing, by the way, is that I was able to notice the paradigm. (For instance we never notice oxygen in the air till it starts to run low and make us feel stuffy, right?) I kick so hard about it, though, because one of the things that's happening is a lot of bunching up, with people, especially younger ones, sort of concentrating resistance to change into smaller areas, yes, but with greater intensity. I'm kicking hoping to help it finish turning over though, not to start it. Thanks, Mag. --fl]