a bit of social diagnosis. part 1
Unisex bathrooms!
So this post was inspired by an article I read on College Times, that was written in response to one of those negative feminist articles. (To tell you the truth, I actually think most feminisms* are negative because they applaud bias.)
It is my personal opinion that we as an American society will GET NOWHERE as long as we continue to think of male and female as separately desirous entities. In my mind men and women usually share the same desires, and any dissimilarities on this plain are the sole cause of an INDIVIDUAL’S sexual fetish. Notice, that I included the word “sexual”. Indeed, I am of the belief that in the debate over what came first, the chicken or the egg, the egg most definitely came first. If you disagree with me on this simple analogy then it’s best if you stop reading all together.
The chicken here would be our society’s version of a “relationship” and the egg would be our society’s interpretation of “sex”. Therefore, I am prepared to uphold the idea that sex is the derivation for any and every relationship.
Yes, I know. It’s a weighty claim. And one that I’m sure many (or even most) would disagree with if for no other reason than to call me “cynic”. Perhaps I am. But I like to think I’m not because I enjoy pretty much every part of life. Particularly mine. :) But I mean no disrespect. If you (this is directed to whoever reads my little blog) are at all intrigued by my initial argument I beg you to keep reading!
In many ways, and in fact almost all when pertaining to America, sex drives society. Let’s go back several thousand years to our ancestry. Applied sex meant higher population. More people translated into strength as a culture. Culture indicated the formation of society, etc. And the rest is, quite literally History. (These are simple connections, I admit, but for the sake of comprehension I refuse to go much further than this until provoked.) History is what we’ve been able to record within our minds, on paper, and through various other mediums as the characteristics of large groups of people, or societies. So in a way, the driving need of human to connect physically with human is the glue that holds our whole socio-political world together.
Having prefaced this random post of sprouting concepts sufficiently I think, I can now delve deeper into the idea’s that plague a middle class American college student. Most particularly…”Where can I find companionship?” and more crudely “Where can I find sex?” The focus here for horny kids is most assuredly on the “where.” Whether we like it or not, our actions lead us down different paths (either physical or metaphorical) so when said college student asks the question “How can I do <concept>?” their subconscious is actually wanting the answer to “Where can I go to actualize <concept> .” Because ultimately Americans are a people of action.
I would have to admit that having been a college student myself before, I’ve asked the question “Where can I find sex?” and was readily answered with the appropriate societal manifestations of my college culture. Parties, clubs, bars etc. Places where people gather together to enjoy their company as well as drink a bit of liquid courage to enhance their own and everyone else’s sex appeal. How lucky! To know of a place to find what you’re after. In this scenario I was after sex. And now, I knew where to find it. You may wonder how I knew. The only way I can respond to this is by saying from relative infancy we are taught that a gathering of people translates into companionship and that may lead to sex. Therefore we are drawn to groups such as these, because of our sex drive.
Now lets go further. For years we have been fed the idea that in the realm of dating the male plays a very important opposite role to the female. The male does the asking. The female the answering. The male must express confidence and comfort while doing the asking. The female must respectively seem shy and understanding of the male no matter her opinion. These are male and female traits we as a society have come to recognize. (I know some of you are smarting right now at my audacity. Particularly women who feel that they have NEVER responded to a male’s “ask out” in this manner. Or perhaps many of you men feel that having to do the “asking out” has NEVER made you feel comfortable let alone confident. Or maybe you are of the opinion that the roles are lately reversed. However! I am simply trying to establish a point by using woefully sexist representations of male vs. female in the dating world. So please excuse my candor, and try not to be completely put off.) The male in an outward display of power, the female in an outward display of submission. What strikes me as interesting is the fact that we’ve only recently started to understand the discourse these sexual models inspire.
Take woman for example. Beneath the outward display of submission. She is in a rather strong position of power. Every time a person is given a choice, they are put in a position of power. However, regardless of this power, it may not at all be the type of power that this particular female yearns for. If we can look at power as a fluid thing, multifaceted and quite personally defined, we may derive a better understanding of the Women’s movements and any perceived failings thereafter. If you can look at power in this way, as a strictly INDIVIDUAL desire, then you may see why feminist’s have received such a bad rap. By relegating the idea of “power” to the male, feminists elicit their own downfall. It is purely in the eye of the beholder. If a woman bemoans that her male counter-part has stolen her power, it is simply because she yearns for a power she cannot define. She most likely has the means and will to access that power however, she is stuck in a societal mold that she refuses to step out of. She is first a Woman, and secondly a human. Therefore she will always think of herself as weak. She will never be able to harness the true power she desires. Feminism as a concept goes completely against humanity. If we as a people are automatically drawn to each other for basic reasons like sex and companionship, to be “feminist” requires you to negate you’re influence amongst a group. To relegate yourself as less than human and therefore not “capable” or “responsible” for your actions. If anything it’s a sin against God and your fellow man. But I apologize. I intended to keep this post secular.
In dissection of the man, there is a similar pattern. We use the term misogynist for a person (usually male) who holds either a hatred or deep mis-trust of women. Looking at the popular model of a confident male in the dating scenario we can see the influence of many years of “male dominated” society. (Please, stay with me.) For example the fact that he must look confident, and comfortable while asking the female a question implies that he is already certain of the answer. Of the POSITIVE answer. There’s really no need for him to ask at all except for the sake of politeness but even that suggests that the female is incapable of making her own decisions. Or, more accurately, recognizing and wielding her own power. Therefore, from the very beginning society expects the man to already know both what he needs and what the female needs. This is a lot of presumptuous responsibility to place on ANYONE’S shoulders whether male or female. If we were to look at this scenario a bit differently as human to human contact, there would be a very healthy and respectful sharing of power and vulnerability without any expectation beyond the pleasure one may glean from the other. Is sex not ultimately the exact same idea? If you are having difficulty understanding this concept, think back to when you had awesome sex. Could it be defined similarly? If not, I’ll get to that.
Here is where I inevitably meet my first roadblock. If we assume that all societies (including America) are working toward utopia, then my critics may deem these theories unreliable. In fact, Durkheim would no doubt argue most readily for the merits of sexual models. After all, how could it be wrong to know your place absolutely in society? Well, I would unfortunately have to agree. There is nothing wrong with knowing your place in society and performing to meet that standard everyday. The thought is just as Utopian as mine. However, it too has faults. The most prominent of them being dissenters. Dissension from the norm is inevitable when people are unhappy. Can you imagine the extreme anger a homosexual would feel if he/she was forced to pursue the opposite sex for the assumed good of society? He/she would rebel, definitely! I am heterosexual, and I can assure you that were I forced to be homosexual in a society I would very much like to leave it. The driving force of a true utopia is universal content.
…to be continued…
*I definitely made that word up.
