Social conditioning - a thread for those who admit it impacts on them.

Florence, I do not recognise either the UK or any Mediterranean country (except, possibly, Turkey and Greece) from your posts. You seem to be generalising very broadly indeed, and highly focused on cosmetic appearance. I know, for example, that social expectations on Greek and Turkish women are very rigid in ways other than fashion.

FoodUnit, thanks for your post about two different kinds of conditioning! I realise I haven't consciously thought about this point for a very long time. Although I observe Type 1, it's the Type 2 that causes me self-inflicted shame and I am curious to explore what I could do about it.

florencejon, then I want to live where you live!!

But why the extremism in the UK? Stubble on legs and heavy duty stubble underarms - perfectly acceptable here. Hair left to dry naturally, especially in Summer - perfectly acceptable. Sweat patches under stubbly arms - normal as it is so fooking hot. In July, arriving at work with sweat patches on back was also the norm.

It just seems so much effort is needed by women in the UK. Waaaaaay more than most other countries. (Huge generalisation, obviously)

I'm looking at my baby daughter and thinking there is a lot of conditioning between me and her - right now she is sitting in a cheese sandwich and spreading the crumbs around.

Socialisation is absolutely essential - (though the lack of it in little ones is very endearing).

There are, I believe two types of conditioning:

1. The conditioning that helps us to remain part of a community and function within it without being alienated.
2. The conditioning to preserve the current status quo. This is non-rational conditioning since it can't stand up to reason and just is.

Behaviours such self-policing and policing others to ensure the formalised inequality of the status quo (type 2) is always framed as just being a considerate/decent/dignified person (type 1). And for those who faithfully uphold the status quo like this, it is incredibly threatening to point out its lack of foundation. Its what 'The Emperors New Clothes' is all about.

I think the way you can tell the difference between the two types of conditioning is if they are not universally the same for everyone, and indicate rank. For example 'body hair is shameful' - but only on women. The 'right to sport body hair is according to status' - males only.

We as a gregarious species will always need to be social and function in a way that does not lead to being ostracised, but there is no necessity that the status quo is the way it is.

Would it be possible to avoid this descending into an antagonistic argument over which sex is the more exploitative out of men and women and just get back on track...

I'd like to add that when on a first date I offer to pay/go halves but don't insist upon it because the singing chorus in my head is going "You'll emasculate him.. do doo do wup"

Is fake hair really a big thing, generally?

I think that women are more exploitative because (gross generalisation) they are, as a group, less well trained in rational thinking that are men. And rational thinking improves people moral conscience.

So why do UK women spend so much money on fake tan, fake hair, etc..... It's damn expensive and a huge financial drain. Women who have no financial independence is the first step to dependence, generally on either the state or a man. Yes, social conditioning, obviously but is there any other country in Europe which takes grooming to this level?

I only found out today that you can have your eye lashes permed. Seriously?? Permed eyelashes? Mumsnet is veeeery informative.

Bonsoir - do you think women are more exploitative because they have been socially conditioned into using less aggressive, less direct methods of achieving their own way? Manipulation and exploitation of circumstances as they present themselves have always been the tools of the less powerful, because those in power can take what they want without having to resort to these methods because they have a social mandate to do so.

Who knows what men and women would be like without any power imbalance between the sexes?

Blistory - that's down to your character, not because you are female.

The strong will exploit the weak regardless of who the strong happen to be. If you think putting more women in charge will make any difference you're deluding yourselves.

Disagree. I think me being the boss does make a difference.

"The strong will exploit the weak regardless of who the strong happen to be. If you think putting more women in charge will make any difference you're deluding yourselves."

Oh absolutely. I actually women are more exploitative than men.

I gave in and had my hair cut today. Couldn/t believe the comments it generated. Hairdresser wanted to know if I'd like some colour to cover my grey. I'm 36 but a couple of grey hairs are aging me.....so what ? Still couldn't bring myself to ever flash a hairy pit at someone. Apparently I now look more professional because heaven forbid I have long hair at my age. And I'm meant to be the boss.

Gosh, I don't think wanting a clean and tidy house is social conditioning. I have tidied my personal space since I was a tiny girl voluntarily whereas my sister's room was always a fleapit. I am naturally tidy and hate clutter - it's got nothing to do with what anyone tells me to do and everything to do with my own tidy mind!

The strong will exploit the weak regardless of who the strong happen to be. If you think putting more women in charge will make any difference you're deluding yourselves.

God yes. I'm socially conditioned to get upset that the house isn't sparkling. I feel responsible for this. DH does not though he should since it's his mess. Having an untidy house makes me feel miserable. This is silly - I know it is. But there you are.

Having a MIL who openly criticises the state of our house doesn't help. Hers is new-pin territory. My own mother (who kept a nice house although not showhouse like MIL) says it's very clean and quite tidy enough and I just don't / can't hear her. I ought to be able to put this into perspective but it pushes a button of mine that society has created iyswim...

Chandon - my point is that it isn't actually that easy to be non-conformist if you are the boss - people have all sorts of societal expectations of you and how you should behave/dress when you are in a position of authority, including your own team(s). You can only get away with it if you are really, really good at your job!

I think capitalism and patriarchy are easy to mix up because they are so intertwined and capitalism definitely exploits the insecurities left by our patriarchal legacy, eg. our fears about not being pretty enough.

wrt. OP, I'd say that I suffer from stereotype threat a lot. Especially when I'm doing something technical, parking the car, or learning anything that is deemed to be a male area of knowledge. Logically I know I am capable but the doubts always niggle.

Oh, and shaving definitely for exactly the reasons Dahlen mentioned up thread.

Great thread idea BTW

Greenhill - yy to the cost, especially for UK women. But the fake tan, hair extensions, gel nail thingies, eye lash perms, eye lash extensions look is so errrrrr fake.

Really think that climate has a huge influence. I cannot imagine having hair extensions in the heat here. It'd be like wearing a wool hat. Make up just slides off in the Summer. Not sure what sea water would do to gel nails but I've never noticed them here. Spray tan not needed as we are outside in the Summer. Actually as we are outside so much, less bombardment by the media, etc from the TV. More realistic body expectations as we see people of all ages in speedos and bikinis from May to October.

Hmmmmmmm, all very interesting.

Patriarchy and capitalism are inextricable IMO. Both require inequality in society and use the other as a means of achieving it.

Green hill don't worry about reading the thread, yours was the first point like that! I do separate patriarchy and capitalism, though each will use the other's strictures, but haven't read many books on it.

thedoctrine. You are probably right about it being capitalism not Patriachy. I'm a bit confused about the terms as each Feminist book I've read does tend to muddle them too or admit to crossover, based on the author's personal political stance.

I'm going to read the thread properly before diving in next time.

My DD is 13 and is still very socially non-conforming.

Doesn't shave, or wear make up or nail varnish.

I often wonder if and when she'll cave in.

Hmm I think that's capitalism rather than the patriarchy. Capitalism uses patriarchy to create product desire and hence spend, perhaps. But it'll happily use any other tools eg fear for our children 's safety (plug guards which I still use though I've read articles stating they aren't any safer than not having them etc).