I’m Not Fine With It

I am so tired. I’m tired of being told that I’m talking about the wrong thing. I’m tired of being told that I’m talking about it in the wrong way. I’m tired of having the subject changed.

Remember how #YesAllWomen got #NotAllMen-ed? Because we couldn’t talk about what happens to us, and our perceptions of society and the world, without people insisting that their point of view was the one we really should be talking about. Well, that happens a lot, and it’s not limited to one topic.

Earlier this week, I participated in an online discussion about female genital mutilation. Ten people participated. Three of us were women. One woman made a single comment; another made three or four. The discussion went on for more than 12 hours, and I was the only woman participating throughout. On its surface, it was for the most part a civil discussion.

Only it wasn’t always about FGM. As seems to happen again and again in discussions about FGM, the topic of male circumcision was brought up, and once it was introduced, it refused to leave. When I had the temerity to suggest that maybe a new thread could be started for that, I was accused of acting like the discussion police. Because we wouldn’t want to miss the chance to stop talking about women.

Yesterday, I came across an article about a new crowdfunding initiative for Miss Possible, a series of dolls “modeled after real women who’ve had path-breaking success in science, technology, space and information technology.”

Nice idea, right? Sure, unless you consider, as one commenter did, “Why no emphasis on the lack of boys and men in HR environments, then? Where’s the effort to recruit boys to HR and other female dominated fields?” He then went on to say that this project will accomplish nothing, because society deems women to be successful when they marry (or partner, presumably), not when they are recognized in their careers of choice.

You know how you get more men in HR? Pay HR more. Raise the salaries, and the men will come. That’s easy. But the idea that there might be value in getting more girls involved in STEM and related subjects? No. We will talk about men, and that is how it is.

But I don’t want that to be how it is. I don’t want to keep people from talking about men and their issues. I just want not to be cut off when I talk about women’s issues. I just want not to be told that I should be accepting of that interruption.

I don’t even want to include a link to #YesAllWomen, as I was planning to. I just went and did a search, and the hashtag is in use. But now it’s being used in ugly misogynist jokes, and I’m not going to help them get more traffic.

Think about that for a minute. We can’t even have a hashtag. We’re not supposed to realize that if we’re being silenced, the discussion is inherently uncivil. We’re not supposed to talk in the first place. And we’re supposed to be fine with that.

I’m not. I’m not.

I’m not.

17 thoughts on “I’m Not Fine With It

  1. Great post! I’m tired of it, too.

    My answer to the commenter who wonders why we don’t try to get more men in HR is… they are there, and they are disproportionately in the upper ranks of the profession. Same thing for librarians and education. The professions as a whole are female-dominated, but the leadership still tends to be male. Oh, and they make more. Of course. (http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/04/07/women-earn-less-than-men-even-in-woman-dominated-jobs/)

    So, in other words, guys “playing devils advocate” or genuinely concerned that men are being discriminated against in these professions: the data says otherwise.

    1. What’s frustrating is that I don’t have an answer, or at least not an easy one–because the only thing I can think of is to keep talking in spite of the interruptions. Otherwise I’m (we’re) not talking at all, and that certainly isn’t the solution.

      1. I think the only thing to do is just what you are doing: Keep talking, keep talking to everyone you meet, show by example. Just imagine yourself as Madeleine Albright–just how far do you think those guys would get indulging themselves if SHE was in the group? Not far, I wager. And be ready with examples to counter the expected “but what about men in…” And don’t be afraid to be the police. Perhaps there were no women in the discussion precisely because it had gotten way off the NAMED topic. If we are not our own “police,” who will be?

  2. It’s such a bummer because success/ambition/etc are so correlated with unlikeability in women, that you have to actually make a choice to be OK with that and/or spend a disproportionate amount of time figuring out how to remain likeable despite having an opinion, being intelligent and wanting to be heard. I literally have to remind myself I will do those things because man do I NOT want to tell the girls that is the trade off.

    1. Agreed. And I feel that lauding success is almost something we have to do, because maybe over time that will even out a bit. But then there’s the flip side where the people I actually care most about may or may not be identified as successful–I care about them because of how the treat people. There’s a lot to reconcile.

  3. Oh, Jodie’s point is so true. If women succeed in the manner or in the fields that men do, we become unlikable at the very least and a whole lot of other things if you really want to get into those nasty stereotypes. The really lousy part is that men don’t have to worry about how to remain likable – they can just do what they do and are seen as “hard working” or “ambitious” where women who do just the same end up with ugly and uncomplimentary labels. Men can be successful AND be fathers; women are presumed to have “made a choice” between career and family. Honestly, what century are we living in??? It’s amazing to me with all the women out there who have accomplished and contributed so much how we still manage to live in a society where these things are still true and still so frustratingly prevalent.
    I’m with you. Not OK.

  4. You know what this reminds me of? When asked how many women should be on the Supreme Court, Justice Ginsberg said “Nine.”
    People have never questioned having nine men on the Supreme Court, why the shock over having nine women? I think we know why.

    Found the quote: “So now the perception is, yes, women are here to stay. And when I’m sometimes asked when will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court]? And I say when there are nine, people are shocked. But there’d been nine men, and nobody’s ever raised a question about that,” she said.

    SMH. NOT ok with the state of affairs at all and will continue to keep saying so.

Comments are closed.