Spring Break
Women more than irrational, man-seeking sex objects
Melissa Brazeale and Dennis Dugan
Issue date: 3/13/09 Section: Forum
After reading Cameron Anderson's March 9th piece, "Bartender's observations render dating advice for women," both of us felt compelled to respond.
Setting aside the inexplicable decision for the Barometer to publish this misguided screed, we both found fault with his column in a myriad of ways.
Starting with the very first line of the column, Anderson reinforces outdated gender roles that prescribe women (let's be clear - NOT girls, as Anderson chauvinistically suggests) to play passive roles in dating relationships. These types of essentialist statements are rooted in a fundamentally mistaken view of human nature that views women as the supposedly naturally-weaker damsel-in-distress who is just sitting there waiting for her "prince charming" to come along and save her, and the man as some kind of emotionally-stunted oaf.
Pardon us while we barf.
If we have learned anything over the past thirty years, it's that gender roles are socially constructed (and therefore unnatural), prescribed and just plain unhealthy for everyone. The idea that all women are overly emotional, irrational, passive and responsible for all communication, should put their needs second, must be careful to not take their "man's" freedoms away and should have as life goals marriage and watching endless romantic comedies is just simply bizarre … while we can't help but wonder if Anderson has watched one too many romantic comedies himself.
Oh, and excuse us while we barf again. Not only do we think that the way in which Anderson describes women is hurtful and false, we don't think it's something anyone should be aspiring to.
We're not sure what century (or reality) Anderson is living in, but in our lives all parties involved in a relationship have (or should have) the same responsibility to communicate and maintain a healthy relationship with the folks they are involved with. But, unlike our reality, Anderson apparently lives in a reality where men should be held to lower standards and have fewer responsibilities in relationships. He paints the picture that men routinely lead women on, cannot communicate, are not genuinely thoughtful, want to be taken care of, are emotionless and, to be blunt, view women as sex objects. We're sorry, but we have higher expectations for men than that, and in our experiences, we know lots of men for whom these statements are both false and offensive.
Setting aside the inexplicable decision for the Barometer to publish this misguided screed, we both found fault with his column in a myriad of ways.
Starting with the very first line of the column, Anderson reinforces outdated gender roles that prescribe women (let's be clear - NOT girls, as Anderson chauvinistically suggests) to play passive roles in dating relationships. These types of essentialist statements are rooted in a fundamentally mistaken view of human nature that views women as the supposedly naturally-weaker damsel-in-distress who is just sitting there waiting for her "prince charming" to come along and save her, and the man as some kind of emotionally-stunted oaf.
Pardon us while we barf.
If we have learned anything over the past thirty years, it's that gender roles are socially constructed (and therefore unnatural), prescribed and just plain unhealthy for everyone. The idea that all women are overly emotional, irrational, passive and responsible for all communication, should put their needs second, must be careful to not take their "man's" freedoms away and should have as life goals marriage and watching endless romantic comedies is just simply bizarre … while we can't help but wonder if Anderson has watched one too many romantic comedies himself.
Oh, and excuse us while we barf again. Not only do we think that the way in which Anderson describes women is hurtful and false, we don't think it's something anyone should be aspiring to.
We're not sure what century (or reality) Anderson is living in, but in our lives all parties involved in a relationship have (or should have) the same responsibility to communicate and maintain a healthy relationship with the folks they are involved with. But, unlike our reality, Anderson apparently lives in a reality where men should be held to lower standards and have fewer responsibilities in relationships. He paints the picture that men routinely lead women on, cannot communicate, are not genuinely thoughtful, want to be taken care of, are emotionless and, to be blunt, view women as sex objects. We're sorry, but we have higher expectations for men than that, and in our experiences, we know lots of men for whom these statements are both false and offensive.
Note: writers will not reply to comments.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Agree
posted 7/06/09 @ 9:47 PM PST
Wow. You said it. All i hear of is 30 yr old catigorizations of the genders and I'm sick of it, i'm glade someone finally told the truth.
Post a Comment
Comments by registered users are approved by default.