Wednesday, January 13, 1999
Stereotypes of women exist in ‘modern’ society
LEADERSHIP: Conference aims to combat lingering idea of female
inferiority
By Melanie Ho
Over break, I watched the film "Elizabeth," the story of the
strong-willed queen of England. Early in the movie, the young
Elizabeth closely follows the words of her advisers, ultimately
causing unneeded death, threatening her power, and bringing the
country further into a downward spiral of destruction. When
Elizabeth decides to follow her own instincts, dismissing her top
adviser, he exclaims something to the effect of, "But you’re only a
woman!"
We may have left behind many practices of the 16th century, but
as I left the theater with those words playing themselves over and
over again on the edge of my consciousness, I wondered how often
I’ve heard similar phrases which imply the inferiority of women.
These phrases reverberate in the thoughts and dialogue of both men
and women today.
Recently, I was discussing politics with a classmate who wasn’t
very familiar with the political system. As we talked about how
members of congress work in Washington, D.C., during the week and
often fly home to their districts during the weekends, she seemed
aghast. "But what about the women? What about their families?"
This was not a great-grandmother living in the time period in
which respectable women didn’t wear pants. This was a UCLA student
born and raised in what we claim to be the most democratic and
open-minded nation on the globe.
It is no wonder that there are only nine women in the U.S.
Senate (of 100 senators). Women represent 50 percent of the
population, but less than 10 percent of our highest legislative
body. My classmate’s dialogue represented the idea that women are
only fit for housekeeping and not for the responsibilities of
governing the nation. This comment is not too different from the
comment that Queen Elizabeth’s character received in the film.
"I’m old-fashioned. I believe the guy should always pay for
dates," a friend once told me. Did she realize that such an
attitude is reflective of a time when men were the only ones with
careers and thus had to pay for dates? Those who were "only women"
were objects to be bought by the sole bread-winning gender.
Many of the women who believe that "the guy should always pay
for dates" will soon enter a work force where they will be greatly
disappointed, since women with the same level of jobs as men are
generally paid less. But how can we expect equal pay if we are not
willing to pay equally?
Last quarter, I heard a joke about marriage. It wasn’t funny to
me, so I didn’t bother to remember it exactly. But it said
something about a woman’s success being judged by the financial
success of her husband.
When I helped a male friend move out of the dorms, it seemed as
if he wasn’t sure whether or not to accept the help. Was it OK for
"only a girl" to assist in carrying stuff?
Several days earlier, I heard someone make an offhand comment
against "women drivers". When another person in the car asked him
about it, he replied that he didn’t mean it seriously, that it
wasn’t a big deal. It is a big deal.
"Guys are just better at science and math." "Women are always
more sensitive." Such comments are common in our dialogue
today.
"You mean that society has conditioned each gender to behave
differently?" I sometimes ask friends who have made such comments,
unwilling to believe that they are being serious. The typical
response is, "No. They’re just better. I’ve never thought about
why."
When people make such blanket statements about what women and
men are better at, without realizing it, that usually means that
the statement is so integrated into their thoughts that they didn’t
have to think about it.
This causes a self-fulfilling prophecy in which people treat
others how they expect them to behave. Thus, people behave how they
are expected to. One who thinks that "girls are better at English
and boys are better at math" is likely to raise a male child and
female child differently, encouraging each child to do what he or
she is respectively "good at" based only on gender.
"They’re just harmless jokes." "I wasn’t thinking." "I didn’t
mean to be sexist." These perhaps are the most frightening
statements of all. What we say when we’re not paying attention
represents what we’re innately thinking when nobody’s looking and
when we’re not worried about being "politically correct." These are
the statements that are the most dangerous because they show that
we ultimately don’t find anything wrong with the thoughts that
these statements represent and imply.
These expressions are a part of our dialogue. They come to us
naturally, just as it was natural, in the film, for Elizabeth’s
adviser to tell her that she was "only a woman" and for Elizabeth
herself to respond not by defending her abilities or her gender,
but instead by replying that she could rule and act like a man.
The solution lies in changing the way we think, in realizing
that there is a problem and that we are all a part of it. In
telling friends and acquaintances about a women’s leadership
committee that is planning the Third Annual UCLA Women’s Leadership
Conference, I was surprised at how many people told me that they
were "not really interested." "I’m not a feminist and not really
into politics," they would say.
Women’s leadership is not just about politics. And feminism (or
women’s leadership or women’s rights or whatever you wish to call
it) isn’t something that can really be defined. It’s about
equality. It’s about stopping and realizing what the "harmless"
jokes and offhand comments represent in a society where women are
not yet equal.
Look at how women are represented in the media. Flip through a
magazine sometime or turn on the television and really pay
attention. Watch how a woman and man at a car dealership are
treated completely differently. How many female business leaders or
filmmakers or famous scientists can most people name?
Women’s leadership is about changing basic attitudes, and it is
these basic attitudes that effect every aspect of our lives.
Last May, at UCLA’s Second Annual Women’s Leadership Conference,
we welcomed the former prime minister of Canada, Kim Campbell, one
of the few women to be heads of state. Conference participants also
attended workshops of such varied topics as "Violence Against
Women," "Women of Color," "Careers and Family," "Men’s Role in
Women’s Leadership" and "Women in Medicine."
We are looking forward to this year’s conference in May 1999, at
which we will continue to change the basic attitudes that prevail
unnoticed in our society today.
Any UCLA students interested in joining the Third Annual Women’s
Leadership Conference Planning Committee should e-mail
[email protected] with your name and phone number.
Comments, feedback, problems?
© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]