When talking about gendered conflicts I normally become somewhat...what's the word I'm looking for, sad? No not sad necessarily but definitely not optimistic either. The fact that in our society we set up gender as a dichotomy really makes it difficult to solve gendered conflicts. When you put two things at either end of a scale, it is nearly impossible to make them meet in agreement. We are constantly taught throughout our lives that men and women are different whether it is biologically, through interests, or even in social roles. Why is it then that while we can't live without each other (in a purely biologically manner) we can't seem to agree either?
Last semester in a class titled "Politics: Race and Gender" I learned that racial schemas in the U.S. are like a zero-sum game. We view a gain on one side as a loss for the other making tensions higher and progress harder. The book we read suggested that gender schemas are unlike race schemas in that they are not zero-sum but I disagree. In many ways gender can be a zero-sum game but the example that first comes to mind is power. Say you are a man in society and are enjoying the power that comes naturally with that. When you find out that women are fighting for "equality" why does this anger you? It is not that women want to be equal because through equality you would lose nothing but gain peers. The only reason why you would think this way is because you think you have something to lose. This makes it a zero-sum game. Why else would men feel threatened by feminism?
No comments:
Post a Comment