That little freakin’ devil that’s always around…

That little freakin’ devil I’m talking about is everyday sexism, obviously. However, today I would like to talk about acceptance of everyday sexism. We as a society are slowly starting to be sensitive to open and hostile examples of sexism – domestic violence, hateful comments,  etc. but we are still either ignorant or passive towards these small displays of sexism that seems like nothing. But they are something. Something actually quite big. And very serious.

Because even the smallest example of sexism, such as jokes or remarks indicates that there is prevalent tendency for treating women with contempt and at the same time undermining their circumstances, successes, achievements, themselves.

The worst thing is that we’ve learned to ignore the exhibits of sexism so not to be perceived as uptight or, even worse, feminist! Especially women are quietly putting up with all the jokes, pinches and insults delivered by men in a “non-serious” fashion, because we are conditioned that women and their issues are perfect subjects to joke about.

So we are told to lighten-up when we hear a joke about rape (because obviously it’s the best subject to joke about) or domestic violence (“taming your woman”) or vaginas (because something that gives a men so much pleasure and holds so much power needs to be laughted at) or lack of professionalism (“If you were a man it would be done better”) and being overly emotional in a conversation (“Control your hormones”). Jokes are a part of everyday interaction, so we should just accept them and come to terms with this sad reality.

Sometime ago I went with my boyfriend to hang out with his friends. At one time it became apparent that there was a feminist in a room (Oh my God, it’s me!) and sexist. I bore some of the remarks (even though those wasn’t really sophisticated), but I cracked up in one point. The abovementioned sexist ask my boyfriend a question:

“What would you prefer: to be with very sexy woman who cheats on you or with a normal good girl who is faithful to you?”

My boyfriend at first had no idea what’s the deal, so he said that basically he is with the sexiest and bestest woman ever who is faithful to him, so it’s no brainer (Awwwwww, he’s a sweetheart!). But the sexist pressured him to give an answer, so my bf replied that of course he would prefer to be with a girl who is faithful to him.

Than the friend asked again: “Well, but would you prefer to eat cake with friends or eat shit alone?”

WTF?!

I was shocked. For me it was like a slap in the face. With a chair. How could ANYBODY feel entitled to compare another human being to shit? How full of yourself (or shit) you have to be to even allow yourself to make this kind of comparison of another people? And feeling that you are in a position to make distinctions between “pretty” and “shitty” woman and subsequently have a real power over validation which women belong to which category.

I’m embarrassed to say as a result of shock I said few stupid misandrist jokes (I hate those, but I really wanted to make him shut up in a most belittling way possible). I achieved my goal (he shut up), but I still feel bad for saying insults towards men (it’s really not my style).

But that’s not all. The situation got even more shocking when, after all of this, I got to talk with other women in the room. They told me to not care about him and his jokes, because it’s just the way he is. Their solution is to just ignore his jokes and then everybody will be happy (because we don’t want to create a tense situation, because somebody might get offended).

If you don't want to listen
to me, then listen to
Ryan Gosling

Why people are so reluctant to object when another person displays sexist and misogynistic attitudes? Why is hardly anybody ever standing up to this kind of jokes and let others know that it’s not funny? Why we keep accepting sexist jokes, even though these are hurtful, offensive, prejudiced and most of the time absolutely unfunny?

I’ve been in various social situations when some controversial jokes where said and somebody stood up to a joker. Those included racist jokes (Man, it’s racist, it’s not funny), jokes about dead foetuses (that’s disgusting, I don’t find this funny), jokes about handicapped people or with some illness (Sick people are no laughing matter, not cool, dude). etc. But I’ve never been a witness to man standing up to sexist jokes. As if those existed in some kind of realm of immunity – a person can be openly sexist in jokes and nobody says anything in fear of…

Yeah, of what? Being called uptight? A bore? Oh wait… a feminist? What’s so terrible about that?

I had this rule about the jokes that if they are about a group of people (men, women, blacks, Chinese, Mexicans, etc.), I find them funny only if you can substitute a certain group with any other (usually the main privileged one) and the jokes will still be funny.

Of course, there are some jokes where the main character cannot be exchange into anything else (jokes about talking parrot), but those are usually not insulting to the main subject of the joke. But that’s beside the point.

Let’s take the abovementioned joke and apply my rule (and let’s make it even more stereotypically womanish).

Vespertilio: Inanna, what would you prefer: to be with this sexy and super rich guy who cheats on you or with a normal, quite poor, but good man who is faithful to you?

Inanna: Well, Vespertilio, I would most certainly prefer to be with a faithful guy.

Vespertilio: Seriously? Well, but do you think is better to share caviar with friends in a posh restaurant or to eat shit alone in a shack?

(To be honest, I feel ashamed to even write this to prove a point). 

Ashamed lion to show you how ashamed I feel.

What are your feelings towards this joke now? Is it offensive? Too aggressive? Too man-hating? Does it treat men as objects?

Now the big question: How many men do you know that would feel offended by this joke?

And if you were a part of audience, would you say something to a woman who said this joke?

I know I would, but I did remark the first joke as well. How about you?

Let’s get back for a second to the deliverer of a joke. The sexist. I just don’t get it. Where does this masculine sense of entitlement come from? How can any man feel to hold the right to debase ANY woman?

In this case we have to spectrums: me, who never comments on somebody appearance, because I’m not a beauty and besides I feel that everybody is beautiful in way; and him, a man who feels that he has a right to judge.

If you want to have a woman that looks like
Victoria Secret model, you should look like
one of Calvin Klein models.

But after that joke, I looked at him and I saw him with critical eye and the situation just got hilarious and ridiculous at the same time. There he was, this almost middle-aged man, fat, bold, with questionable hygiene and not really pleasant appearance, who has been alone for a long time, unable to pick up a girl (I know it from his various stories), afraid of rejection, who has nothing special to offer to a woman (he was neither sexy, handsome, smart, witty nor well-spoken), and yet he felt that he has a choice of women and he can choose a porn star over a normal, but in his eyes “shitty” woman.

Well that’s just bullshit.

I remember once my friend said that equality between women and men will be achieved when this fat, sweaty, bolding, unattractive woman will be walking down the street and she will be convinced that every men on the street wants to have sex with her. Well, there is nothing wrong with high self-esteem, but when this self-esteem translates into certainty of privilege to somebody’s attention, body and integrity, then we are a witnesses of everyday sexism.

Everyday sexism is a phenomenon which disproportionally befall the women. Staring, catcalling, grabbing, harassing, stalking in public places and belittling, degrading and humiliating in workplace, schools, social gatherings. Just from the top of my head I can describe many situations where I’ve been grabbed, harassed, slapped in the ass. I’ve been a victim of frotters, voyeurs, stalkers and flashing. Countless of times I’ve heard that I’m less intelligent, vain, emotional and irrational – all judgements based on the fact that I’m a woman. And since I’m declared feminist, nobody values my opinion, because it’s perceived as distorted, irrational and overly aggressive (even though I didn’t have a possibility to speak my mind, not to mention raise my voice).

And above all of that I was put into the category “women like shit” by some insolent and half-wit sexist, who believed that he’s male privilege allows him to comment on women in any way he pleases, because it’s his "birth right".

Everyday sexist is serious not because of the level of harassment it implies, but mainly because it’s scope and prevalence. Every woman has plenty stories to tell. But the worst thing about everyday sexism is that it widely unrecognised, ignored and depreciated issue that all of the women of all ages are facing.

Written by Vespertilio

Unwanted Kisses, Obligatory Handshakes, Pre-War Decorum and Feminism

Recently I had a pleasure of reading a very insightful and interesting interview (more like informal chit – chat - in Polish) with famous Polish rapper – Adam “Łona” Zielinski. In addition, Adam is a friend of the family and I know from the fact that he is freakishly intelligent so I eagerly indulged in the lecture while drinking my morning coffee.

The interview was mostly about everything and nothing, little bit about politics, little bit about social situation in Poland, little bit about himself. It was the brain-stimulant I need before getting ready to conquer the world – easy to read, yet very sharp and thought-provoking.

And then it happened. One fragment DID provoke me to think about the issue further.

Of course, recently if we start talking about doctors in Poland (and issues of women’s patient rights violations), automatically there has to emerge subject of feminism. And here it what was said (I did a quite awesome translation, I must say):

Interviewer: Would you participate in the Slut Walk?

Adam: No. However, I grieve when I see women who are falling into patriarchal system of thinking themselves.

Interviewer: I grieve when female politician talks about parities and then she’s offended when a man addresses her the same way as any other friend.

Adam: Okay. I myself do not agree with equal treatment, I would prefer to be gentlemen towards ladies. But it doesn’t mean that woman shouldn’t have equal rights. My female colleagues are the amazing lawyers. They are substantially better than their male colleagues, yet they earn less. I can forgive feminists the pathos, form, rabidity. On one hand I defend equal rights, on the other – the image of pre-war gentleman and ladies. I would love to see woman who is both feminist and lady, and for the world to appreciate and promote it. May the word “lady” prevails in use. No harm will come to feminists if they allow to preserve it. It’s a nice word.

Basically, this fragment mimics the entire interview – it’s witty and comprehensive. And yet something is missing here. Depth.

Let me explain.

First: The choice of Slut Walk as example of feminist activity.

Ban Ki Moon

It always baffles me why everybody keeps mentioning only the most controversial activities of some factions of feminism? There is such a wide spectrum of types of feminism: liberal, radical, Marxist and socialist, cultural, black, eco-feminism and probably millions of others examples, as probably each woman is a feminist in different way. But we all have this radical and provocative notion that women are actually human beings and deserve equal rights. Different groups can have different vision and agendas regarding what is specifically meant by “equality” and most importantly all of the groups have different vision of how to bring equality into the society. So please, tell me, where this persistence of giving label “feminist” only to the most radical and controversial groups came from? And why there is this persistence in ignoring all this high profile people, who are obviously feminists? Just because they are not showing their tits and yelling, they are not worthy to be called “feminist”?

I would love to see an article (or video or song or anything) where somebody sparks a  conversation about feminism starting from: “what do you think about Angelina Jolie’s speech during Global Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict?” or “What do you think about Anna Dryjańska’s feminist activity?” or if you don’t want to go into heavy stuff: “Laci Green really have a point (didn’t have a point) in her video about…”; or to have male representation “have you seen any video of Jackson Katz? What do you think about male feminists?”.

And yet there is this persistent, consistent, insistent and absolutely annoying mania for sticking to feminist stereotypes of aggressive behaviour, “rabidity”, questionable personal hygiene and expression of other forms of behaviour widely described as “masculine”.

Second: Preservation of ladylike behaviour

I understand where Adam is getting here. After WW2 Poland lost many representatives of aristocracy and intelligence, scientists, poets, writers and therefore we lost our models for higher standards of behaviour. With emergence of communism the promotion of hard work and simplicity, the state of that pre-war decorum deteriorated even further until it was totally forgotten. I also weep for those times, especially when I’m going to the theatre and I see people in jeans and sneakers, or people wearing sports clothes in the church.

There is nothing wrong in longing for seeing people behaving more… gracefully and tactfully. But it is wrong to pinpoint specifically the disconnection between “ladylike behaviour” and feminism. The truth is, we are so far from that times. Men in general couldn’t be more apart from the image of gentlemen – instead there is plague of rude, sex driven, sexists. In such situation, expecting women to protect the word “lady” and generally “ladylikeness” is showing the worrying insistence in preserving the perception of how women should behave, but at the same time absolutely ignoring the fact that men rarely have to adhere to any properly stated form of behaviour. Especially the one that requires them to respect other people, women in particular.

Again, I understand Adam’s love for those standards. However, I don’t see it happening in the nearest future. Not because it’s against “feminist agenda”, but because it is simply not feasible, as in the modern world women cannot be graceful, moderate and passive (as pre-war ladies were) and at the same time fight with everyday sexism and being silenced, objectified, belittled and not taken seriously. You cannot expect women to preserve and promote ladylike behaviour without strongly promoting gentlemanlike behaviour and equal rights.

In short: mutual respect for each other as human beings and our rights.

However recently, with this obsession for promoting men’s rights to sex, their promiscuity, rough masculine power and ruthlessness, there is little gentlemen left. And if those few golden boys want to improve general standard of behaviour, the job need to be done starting from their fellow men and then they can start complaining that there is deficit of ladies. Otherwise it just sexist and discriminatory.

Third: Wanting equal treatment equals being treated like a “one of the guys”.

Let me quote the fragment again: Interviewer: I grieve when female politician talks about parities and then she’s offended when a man addresses her the same way as any other [male] friend.

Actually, this fragment is so ridiculously inappropriate and shallow that I had no idea where to start.

Okay, I think I know.

There is huuuuge difference between equal treatment and equal rights (what actually Adam pointed out). Personally, I never understood the logic behind arguments claiming that feminists by equal rights they secretly want to be men.

For example: “I fight for equal rights” and answer “so why don’t you go work in quarry” or “I don’t know why you feminists don’t want to shave your legs” or like here “you are feminist so why don’t you carry heavy bags”. I really don’t know how some people can go from equal rights to unshaven legs. Or carrying heavy things. I don’t carry heavy bags not because I am hypocritical feminist, but because they are heavy and my boyfriend is stronger. I believe the logic: “he/she who is stronger does more things that require strength” has its merits.  

But all of this has nothing to do with the subject. Like Adam pointed out, feminists are advocating for equal right, for example to education, to progression in career, equal pay, to sexual freedom, to choose who to marry, when to have kids, with whom to have kids. And finally the right to participate in public life and be greater in numbers in governmental representation.

I don’t see the transition from talking about political participation of women to the nonverbal statement of “I actually want to be a guy”. Why is it so difficult to understand that we feminist first and foremost want to have equal rights, but at the same time still remain the women (whatever the hell that means)?

There is also one other problem with this statement: assuming that by wanting equal rights we simply want to be treated as guys.

Well, for example I don’t. I want to be treated as human being, not a representative of a gender.

Let me elaborate further on this. Imagine Frank. Frank is your good friend. Now think about Frank’s interaction with other men. How he interacts with his best friend, classmates, random friends from school, his teachers, his father, grandfather or distant male relative. Does he treat them the same way? Everybody, the same way?

Probably not. Frank adjusts his behaviour in male-to-male interaction according to the status, personality, age, etc. of other man. And that’s a natural thing. Because there is no prescribed ways of social interaction in man-man relationships, even friendships, the same as there is no prescribed ways of woman-woman interaction.

There is, however, an acceptable way of social interactions between man and woman and it implies that woman should agree to the way that man chooses to interact with her. Does he want to kiss her hand? Well, she better accepts it gracefully. He doesn’t want to kiss her hand instead he prefers to shake it, but she wanted the kiss? She shouldn’t have expect that, because he wants to treat everybody equally. He shakes hands with men but doesn’t with women and she wants to shake hands. Is she crazy?! She’s woman. Etcetera etcetera etcetera…

Now let’s back to the interviewer’s statement.

Why the notion of “equal treatment” implies being treated like “one of the guys”? That’s not equal. That’s enforcing dichotomy of interaction and rejection of greater spectrum of human interactions. And that’s sexism at its best. By imposing stereotypical “guys” ways of interaction as an equal treatment, we totally ignore somebody’s right to have their comfort zones, both men and women, and how they want to interact with each other and others.

Generally, there is no space for accepting that we actually want to be treated as human beings and therefore have the RIGHT to choose how we will interact with others in our everyday lives. Why this female politician cannot choose how she will be treated by her colleagues? Just because she fights for equal rights, does it mean she abandoned her right to be respected and being treated the way she wants to be treated?

Sure, some feminists want to be treated like men. But some don’t. And yet they also want to be treated equally. How? It can be achieved by respecting our boundaries, by respecting our willingness or lack of willingness to participate in certain practices and most importantly by allowing us to express our opinion on this issue. Without judgements, labelling, ridiculing, belittling.

I know that this statement implies some level of schizophrenia and bipolarity. But it’s actually very easy to achieve by following 3 A’s rule: Act, Ask, Accept or Ask, Accept, Act. (I leave it to your discretion).

So for example, Frank wants to kiss Mary’s hand, but she doesn’t want that. Frank asks what kind of method of greeting she prefers, she answers that she prefers to kiss on a cheek (or headshake or wave from the distance). Franks accepts that.

And conversely, if Frank wants to shake hands, but Mary would preferred to be kissed, she should say so. But she should also ask and accept Frank if he doesn’t practice hand-kissing in any case.

Again it's not only about handshake or kiss. That’s just a simple example for mutual respect and acceptance of equal right to choose how the person wants to be treated. But it can be applied to every human interaction.

Sometime ago there was this whole issue about a model who didn’t want to kiss Tour the France winner. There were comments like “I feel bad for the guy”, “that girl is a jerk” or “she is full of herself”. But most were just missing the point: that simply she didn’t want to give him a kiss, even though that’s the type of social situation, where it seems the kiss is “appropriate”.

Just to quickly sum up: I admire Adam and his work and I really value his opinion. The interview generally was well spoken and the questions led to really engaging conversation. But as comes to feminism, equal rights, equal treatment and forming opinion on this matter, both speakers should just check their facts first. And it wouldn’t hurt anybody to just accept that the world is changing and women’s behaviour will also change, but it would be lovely if we were free to decide about this ourselves. 

Written by Vespertilio