This one will really get me into trouble, but the trouble won’t start until tomorrow, because for once, I’m not outnumbered by females at my house. I’m home alone at the moment, with one of my sons coming over later. My wife and daughters are all out of the state — one’s even out of the country — so here goes…
The other night I was at this black-tie affair at which Darla Moore was being honored, which is only right, because she’s done quite a bit for her home state in recent years. Anyway, when it was her turn to speak, she made a big deal about being a woman — even though I would have known she was a woman right off, without her calling attention to the fact — and that she was among the few ever inducted into the Business Hall of Fame who was not a white guy.
Which is true. OK, fine. Then she kept going on about it, telling an anecdote about a previous inductee — it seems that somebody writing about over a century ago praised her for founding the indigo industry in our state in these terms: "Indigo proved more really beneficial to Carolina than the mines of Mexico or Peru were to Spain." That was fine, but then he made the mistake of adding, "was a result of an experiment by a mere girl."
Darla really teed off on that, allowing as how if she had been around when he wrote that, he’d have regretted it. She kept repeating it, packing maximum irony into "mere girl" each time she said it. The ladies in the audience seemed to like this, while the men tolerated it the way we always do when ladies go on like this. We’re used to it.
Here’s the thing: Darla Moore was there because of what she’s done, not because she was a woman. Eliza Lucas Pinckney would also have been there for what she did. From a man’s perspective — and that’s the only one from which I know how to write — it seems to take away from the accomplishment to go on and on about gender. Like you’re a token or something, when you definitely are not. Tokens don’t found agricultural empires, or give their alma maters $25 million at a pop.
One other thing: Eliza Lucas Pinckney was born in 1722, and moved to South Carolina in about 1738. Her experiments with indigo took place "in the late 1730s." So she was what — between 15 and 18? To me, that’s a mere girl. And the fact that she was a mere girl, and her mama had died and her father had had to run off and leave her there almost as soon as they moved to the plantation (he’s the one who sent her the indigo seeds, from way off in Antigua where he was serving in the British army), make her achievement all the more impressive.
I say all this not to put down Darla Moore. I’m just saying I don’t think I’ll ever understand the impulse from which such comments arise.
Oh, I can explain them intellectually. I can give the very same explanation most women would give about such things: It’s a man’s world, a woman has to work harder to gain acceptance, she has to overcome expectations and gender roles, etc.
But I still don’t get it. It seems that once you’ve overcome such obstacles, long ago, and you’ve more than made it in this world, such things would lose their power, and it wouldn’t occur to you any more to bring them up. The fact that she — and so many other powerful women — do bring them up, and often, just seems odd to me. Does it seem that way to other guys?
I think it’s kind of a woman thing, like enjoying "click flicks" or something. And I don’t think it arises from the ostensible causes. I think it arises from the differences in the way women perceive and interact with the world, as a result of physiological difference — no, not those physiological differences, I’m talking about differences in the brain.
I think it’s easier to see that with a related phenomenon — the way successful women are always turning and helping out younger women coming behind them, and the younger women sort of seem to expect that, and it’s a big social thing with lunches and mentoring sessions and seminars and so forth and so on. Nobody in the white-collar world makes anything of this, it’s just so common and all very out in the open and expected. And it’s very much a female thing.
Yes, I realize that the feminist explanation is that guys — white guys, at least — never needed such support system, and that’s why it all seems a little odd, and even unseemly, to us that anyone would be reaching around them trying to boost up people like them instead of just people in general. We’ve been indoctrinated to know that we’re not supposed to do that, and besides we don’t need to do that, yadda-yadda.
But I suspect that while such causes are present, there’s something deeper, something inherent, going on. It’s the same thing about how when boys play games, it’s all about rules and keeping score and competing, while girls tend to emphasize the social aspect, and want it to be about everybody having a good time and getting along. I’ve read about this, and I’ve seen it in real life. Guys tend to go out for a sport because they like it or think they’re good at it (or because they think girls might see them doing it). Girls — my daughters anyway — tend to only go out for teams that their friends are going out for. It’s frustrating to see a girl with ability quit a team because her friend quit a team, and it’s very hard for me to imagine doing that. But on a when it’s happened, after a debate or two I’ve just had to swallow and accept that.
And note that the reason it’s frustrating is that I want the girls to do well; my raising this issue isn’t some anti-female thing; it’s just an I-don’t-get-it thing.
I’ve probably made enough trouble now. I’ll move on …
Related Posts
Isn’t it amazing what one woman can do when she marries a billionaire.
So you’re saying it wasn’t worth the $225 you spent on the ticket to go?
The newspaper is one of the main sponsors of the event, Bill. We always have a table. And it was just fine. The honors were all much deserved.
It’s not about the event. It’s about the phenomenon. Many successful women talk like that. It struck me because (and this is my skewed, white male perspective, I suppose) it seems to me that she was neither honored BECAUSE she was a woman, nor IN SPITE OF the fact. And yet, she brought attention to it in a manner that, if a man did it, would be seen as his having a chip on his shoulder.
But it’s a regular thing with women, and seen among them as a positive thing, and I just think that’s an interesting difference. There’s a woman far richer and more powerful than I will ever be, and yet she speaks as though she has this disadvantage.
Not having been a woman, nor in her position (and I could never be in her position in any sense, man OR woman, because I’ve never had any interest in high finance, but that’s beside the point), I don’t understand what obstacles she has overcome. I can STATE them, but not understand them. And I’m sure many women will read this and marvel at my stupidity. But there it is.
I may get into trouble for saying so, but I’d say there is a basic insecurity here. It is an insecurity that is certainly understandable–women have generally not been treated well throughout history, regardless of which culture we think about. Jesus certainly exhibited a totally different understanding of woman’s place and standing, in opposition to a culture where a pious Jew thanked God regularly that he was “not born a woman.” With a few matriarchal cultures excepting (that only prove the point)– it has been a world of male power and dominance.
Maybe it takes awhile to get over that. I don’t know–I too am a man, and also stupid.
Yes, Jesus was totally cool. But he did speak sharply to his mother and called her “woman” in a way that essentially said, “Get off my case, woman.” I’m speaking of when they ran out of wine at the wedding in Cana.
Of course, he still did what she told him. I wonder if she gave him one of those looks.
How about Mary and Martha. He let Martha do all the housework (of course, he WAS a guest) and excuses Mary for sitting at his feet hanging on his every word — which women can tell you is the very best way to flatter a man so that he’ll be on her side.
I don’t mean to sound sacrilegious. I just wonder a lot about what it was really like being around Jesus — for his mother, his “father” Joseph, his brothers and sisters, his friends. THEY weren’t divine, so how did they deal with it? We have some accounts, but I wonder about more. As John wrote, Jesus did a lot in his 33 years beyond what is recorded in those four brief accounts.
We miss a lot, and also sometimes misinterpret, because we do not understand the Middle Eastern culture in which the biblical material is generally imbedded (which is one of my beefs with current U.S. foreign policy, which does not understand honor-shame cultures, either, and assumes the rest of the world lives in a cowboy culture as well).
Dr. Kenneth Bailey has done a lot of work in the field of biblical interpretation in the light of Middle Eastern culture, and enlightened, among other things, the parables of Jesus (especially the so-called “Prodigal Son”) and Jesus attitude toward women. Someone has noted that talking to an old bedouin can be more enlightening on biblical happenings and stories than reading a 1000 theologians.
That being said, exegetical work is important. Among other things, it is important to note that in Luke 10:41, the verb “bothered” is actually in passive voice, and should be translated more strongly like “controlled by,” perhaps even “irritated and enraged.” Of all the modern translations, in “The Message” probably comes the closest (but see Dr. Bailey’s explanations.
One shouldn’t forget, either, that Jesus was a man with a mission. Nothing was allowed to interfere with what he knew he was called to do. It wasn’t just his divinity that propelled him, but his sense of purpose.
Don’t know what was wrong with those links above, but try this one and this one, too.
Which doesn’t answer your question, Brad, about being around Jesus, but reading through the Gospels one gets the impression that all of his friends couldn’t get enough of him. They weren’t even put off when he called them called one of them “Satan”, or took them to task.
Blasted link still doesn’t work. Another try.
Jesus didn’t have colleagues. Jesus wasn’t privileged. Jesus didn’t attend black-tie affairs. Jesus certainly didn’t honor the Pharisee. What did Jesus say?
“If you want to be perfect, go and sell everything you have and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” But when the young man heard this, he went away sadly, for he was very rich.
Then Jesus said to his disciples, “It is almost impossible for a rich man to get into the Kingdom of Heaven. I say it again — it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God! When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astounded and said, “Then who can be saved?” And Jesus replied, “For mortals it is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”
“If you wish to be perfect, (which will be almost impossible for a rich person) go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.”
When the young man heard this word, he went away grieving, for he had many possessions.”
” No slave can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.” The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all this, and they ridiculed him. So he said to them, “You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of others; but God knows your hearts; for what is prized by human beings is an abomination in the sight of God.”
So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions. Salt is good; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored? It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; they throw it away. Let anyone with ears to hear listen!”
As he was setting out on a journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?””You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; You shall not defraud; Honor your father and mother.'”
He said to him, “Teacher, I have kept all these since my youth.”
Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said, “You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.”
When he heard this, he was shocked and went away grieving, for he had many possessions.
Then Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!” And the disciples were perplexed at these words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
They were greatly astounded and said to one another, “Then who can be saved?”
Jesus looked at them and said, “For mortals it is impossible, but not for God; for God all things are possible.”
“How come ladies act like that?” Maybe to remind everyone that we shouldn’t be left out of the conversation?
I agree that today we should be at a point where it’s not necessary to make a big deal about a woman’s gender, where we ought to focus on her accomplishments. But I think that without the reminder of where we came from, how good we have it now, and what we had to overcome to get here, there’s the risk that complacency will give the next generation of women fewer opportunities than we had.
Thanks, Susanna, for trying to help me understand. I don’t think I ever will, but one should always hope.
I just don’t have the slightest idea what it’s like to identify myself with a group, or to attach great importance to that. Other people try to PUT me in groups, such as Mark in the comment above, suggesting I am “privileged” (he should have been up with me at 1 a.m. today, trying to figure out how to juggle bills to make it through the next two paychecks without having another overdraft charge), but I don’t feel like a member of such groups. I can move among people and not identify with them, other than relating to THIS individual or THAT one, purely as individuals.
Of course, I’m not blind; I notice that most people who say “can’t we just deal with people AS people” tend to be white middle-class heterosexual males who speak English. But I don’t identify with those other guys. I don’t take joys in their triumphs — or at least, certainly not because I identify with them. I am quite aware of being a guy as opposed to a “chick,” but I don’t see that as having some sort of political significance. I do relate to women differently from the way I do to men, partly because they act differently toward me. But I don’t feel like I’m on a team or anything.
This is a difficult thing to explain, which is why, if other people think what I’m thinking, they usually have the good sense to keep mum about it.
As for Mark’s comments on Jesus: Absolutely, Mark, except that Jesus ate out with rich people more than I do. He alienated a lot of followers doing that, and he gave his detractors an excuse to call him a wine-bibber and a glutton.
One thing he was not was anybody’s ideologue — probably to Simon Zealot’s great disappointment. He was cool with all people.
Good point on Jesus again, Brad. One of the reasons he was crucified, at least from a human point of view, was that he disappointed everybody’s political expectations. He doesn’t conform to anyone’s ideology.
I guess I just repeated what you already wrote. Oh well, I do it all the time, so nothing new.
Hey, repeating what others wrote is good theology. I think so, anyway, being Catholic and all.
By the way, I mentioned that my younger son was coming over later. Well he did, and we went to see “300” at the dollar theatre over off St. Andrews.
This will shock you, but it offered no helpful elaboration on our understanding of the ways of women.
Well, if you get more insight, let us know.
Lying awake in the night, it occurred to me that Jesus was wonderfully focused, because he knew he was going to die. The Gospel writers are pretty plain about the fact that he defined his ministry in terms of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Over a third of their narrative is concerned with Passion Week.
Nothing like death at the door to focus one’s mind on what’s important.
Hey, Brad, you don’t get it. It’s not what you consider yourself, it’s how other people judge you.
Try this experiment: put on clown make up everyday for a month… pancake white with an exaggerated mouth and a big, round red nose.
Judge how seriously people take you.
While, I don’t think that disrespecting women is quite so overt anymore, it’s still there– and, it’s NOT because of a poor makeup job.