I've been working through the girl thing lately. The girl thing: I'm a girl. Girls do dumb things, I do dumb things. Sometimes men don't like women, sometimes I don't like women. I feel torn because I feel like I should really like and appreciate women and who they are and what they do (and I do) and at the same time, the things that frustrate me most about dumb girls are things that I feel like I have a tendency toward. Irritating.
I watched Olivier's Merchant of Venice the other day for class and Joan Plowright did this really creepy Portia. Creepy: she was older than her suitor Bassanio, they emphasized lines that brought out her kind of domineering self ("you will be loved dearly for you were bought dearly" and Bassanio cringes), and they did this camera angle thing when she was monologuing that demonstrated that everyone else was bored and impatient and she continued to monologue, clueless. I always had like Portia--she's smart and gutsy and gets things done, right? Turned into this selfish rich wench with a castrating smile.
And literature. I'm reading lots of McCarthy. He's brilliant but his women are goddess-virgin-whores. Dr. Snyder is super idealistic about all of this, arguing that McCarthy's heroes really just want a good women to settle down with, but the blatant comparison of women to horses just doesn't set well with me. And it seems to me like in general the literature that I really love is very androcentric and women play either static or abrasive characters.
And then there's Julie Beck who I want dearly to like, but who puts me on edge after her conference address (and, I'll admit, a round tearing apart by the gang).
My sister read Juno in an interesting way--that she, more than most female protagonists, was the hero of the movie. She took control of her situation: when she got pregnant, she decided to put the baby up for adoption and decided on the parents and even pushed the adoption through to the end. Cool. Also cool: the Jennifer Garner character ends up not being the witchy domineering wife but the irresponsible husband's irresponsibility is highlighted.
My stake president encouraged the Relief Society to find women role models, women to look up to and emulate, and it's a pursuit I should probably undertake. I just am unsure of how to be a girl. And a strong girl and a smart girl and one who tries to see the best in people.
This is very half-chewed through still.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Feminity and Me
Posted by Kjerstin Evans Ballard at 12:44 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Interesting thoughts. I've had many similar ones. I think that I've had to let go of a lot of feminine ideals to accept myself. I recognize that I am not a "typical" female and I am glad for that. However, no matter what I do, I will always be a woman and I am also glad for that (unless it's a sex change... haha). I don't know if I'll ever get to the point where I won't need a man to help me feel validated as a woman. It's not that I have some kind of disney princess complex, it's just that we need them and they need us (well, in a perfect world). I don't know if that contributed at all to your post, but I guess I will always be a little foggy on what the purest female is until I actually meet her and I know that will only happen when I leave this world. All we have here are corrupted ideals that are usually not based on anything God intended. I'll just have to be content to be who I am for right now. It's difficult to be a woman in this world.
Did you happen to catch the CES fireside last night? Sure, Sister Beck did her whole irritating "women should make eternal decisions"=staying home with kids, but I do give her props for one thing. She openly spoke against women who think men want simpering, temper tantrums from their spouses. So, a modest step in the right direction?
Yeah, but she implied that girls throw temper tantrums. It might be true--but I think the idea of a tantrum is more of a matter of not feeling able to express yourself because it's hard to feel comfortable in a society that doesn't really value feelings and it's hard to express yourself to guys who don't know what it's like to sometimes just feel emotional and to want to sort through the emotions, but not knowing how really. And I kind of resented that there was not correlative "don't snap at girls you like" or whatever the counterpart may be to boys. And I resented the laughter. I dislike high maintenance girls as much as the next kid, but when you allow all attempts at expressing emotion to be labeled a tantrum (which is degrading in the first place, and which I think happens) what are we allowed to do? Take it like a man?
Two main points. 1) I think I am the sister mentioned, and I started noticing that men-of-a-certain-age (over 40) hated Juno. I think it is because they want Juno to be either a virgin or whore and get irritated when she is not. Which is when I concluded Juno must be a true, proactive hero, AND (surprise)female. Feminism is SO generational. 2) In spite of how it might make us all bristle just a bit, President Beck (notice how we all call her Julie or Sister? She IS a President) ought to say things that the rest of the world won't or doesn't, and it is actually quite validating to those of us who are staying home with the kids and yet, somehow, remain intellectually/spiritually engaged. Finally: having been married 12 years, I can see that the fe/male thing becomes less pertinent when you're involved in a mature, loving, equitable relationship where "becoming one" actually means something. You might feel like you need to be validated by a man, but guess what? Men crave valdiation from their woman. For whatever that's worth.
Actually, if we trust the Ensign's editorial staff, Sister is the proper title for the general relief society president. Now, whether that's right (rather than just correct) is a whole other kettle of fish. As always, I blame correlation for this fact.
Taken at face value, the comparison of women to horses is unseemly, sure. But let's not forget that horses are gods and lovers to McCarthy's men.
For what it's worth, McCarthy's descriptions of women are similar to his descriptions of God. I don't know that it's totally accurate to call his women always static or abrasive. Sometimes they're ethereal, otherworldly and transcendent. That doesn't seem static to me. In McCarthy, women are like ghosts that haunt men, like a spirit that fills the immensity of space. Like talking about the Virgen de Guadalupe: "In Meixco there is no God. Only her."
Of course, we do get back to the fact that emphasis on God's transcendence is distancing and dehumanizing. So maybe the point of this post is that women in McCarthy might be treated unfairly, but at least they're in good company? I don't know.
Hi Kjerstin... hope I'm not intruding on your thoughts, but I discovered your blog (I've been really into blogging lately, and I find great satisfaction in getting good ideas from smart friends).
I loved this post. I'm glad this whole being a girl thing is not only my problem...
As for Sister Beck... sigh. I probably shouldn't start. But I've had her on the brain today because I watched as much as I could gag down of her CES fireside that was replayed on KBYU today, and I guess I just empathize with your desire to like her even though you're wary of her. I'm not wary of her. Okay, I am, but I also don't like her. Flat out. Immature response I know, but be thankful you didn't know me in October. I mos def have seen some strong, smart women that I love, but unfortunately, I'm not sure even one of them are married or doing the family thing. Hrm. A conundrum indeed. And I agree with you about Phil being overly optimistic about women in McCarthy. Speaking of Phil... I better go get cracking on that proposal thing, since it's due tomorrow by 5pm and all. :)
Post a Comment