Feminism - but is there some truth in the stereotype of gender roles?

[loveyoumore2]

I understand that feminism has its place, 100%. The way women are treated in some parts of the world, (and I will agree), in the western world to an extent, is wrong. And feminism is needed to that effect.

What I can't get my head around is that on some level, generally speaking, I believe women are more suited to the stereotypical 'woman's jobs,' and likewise, men are suited to their jobs. I embrace the fact that I am the one staying at home and look after my kids while my husband works (and this is coming from someone who has a very successful career and earned pretty much the same as my husband). I love cooking his dinner and cleaning the house. I don't feel oppresed. I am also attracted to my husbnad because he embraces his stereotypical male role of the breadwinner. I feel proud of my role as a women and I am proud that it differs from my husband's general role.

I know that the point of feminism is that everyone should be free to do what they want, male or female, and that men, if they want, should have the right to stay home with the kids.

But does anyone agree that on some basic level, instinctive almost, that for the majority of people (again, not all), that women do have women desires that are typical of a women, and the same for men?

ie. women are generally better at cleaning and tidying and naturally take the reigns, men prefer heavy lifting and DIY, women will be more motherly with kids than men, etc. NB. I know this is not always the case, but I am speaking generally. I believe stereotypes in this instance, are based on natural differences between men and women that we will never get away from. (Again stressing that there are exceptions).

Women can certainly be very aggressive. You are focusing purely on physical violence in society, as if it is natural that more men commit acts of violence because of testosterone, and again ignoring environment and the limitations of what people may want to do and what they are able to do.

If martial arts are a great way to channel aggression and to learn strong moral codes, self-discipline and respect, it would be ludicrous to see it as a solution for boys only as approaching certain things with peoples sex in mind suggests.

I hate cleaning, not a fan of cooking either, but I can run rings around my dad and brother when it comes to DIY and mechanical stuff - they're both useless.

To quote Terry Pratchett - once the children are on solids, there's no such thing as "women's work".

But according to some, if you say you don't like cleaning, you are massively insulting people who chose to become SAHP.

No, I don't know how or why they make that leap either, but ho hum.

Currently sitting in a bar where a large group of sportspeople have just finished a week-long recreational tour. 90% male, 10 % female. They are doing an awards ceremony. Person (male) with the most "balls"/"lunacy" (aka best performance) has just received a case of super-strong beer. Person displaying "the most girly behaviour who's not a girl" has just received a pink bottle of cherry beer. There were three candidates mentioned - one for having a 'girly' suitcase (I genuinely cannot see what is 'girly' about the suitcase) , one for coming on tour with a suit carrier and the winner was the guy that wore pink well-known specialist-for-this-sport brand socks one day … Ah well, at least this guy can be happy that he's "tolerant, perceptive, caring etc. etc."

You think it's amusing that the word 'girl' is used as an insult?

Jaysus. You must need a strong drink after all that crap Laurie.

Come on Jdee41 - have you read my posts on this thread? Do you think I'm bothering to post because I think it's amusing? What I find really depressing is the women in the group just letting that pass with no comment.

I took you up wrong, then. Sorry, bit raw with fathers day stuff.

I'm not all that sure what was so wrong with the suggestion that 'girly' could/should mean more positive things though. Compare this:

Manly - strong, capable

Boyish - innocent, charming

...with this:

Girlish - weak, frivolous

Womanly - can be positive, but often means 'matronly'

Not really fair, is it?

I wonder if the rise of 'girly' as an insult coincides with the demise of the use of the word 'gay' as an insult.

I never thought of that.

Language matters so much though. Reclamation of language has been such a huge part of race relations and gay rights - the same holds true for feminism.

I'm not all that sure what was so wrong with the suggestion that 'girly' could/should mean more positive things though

By describing something as boyish, womanish, girly, manly etc. you are reinforcing/creating a problem because very few people fit those stereotypes completely… very few… for all the women or men who are fulfilling their roles in terms of behaviour, some of whom do so happily some not, are they really split personality-wise into aggressive/competitive/risk-taking v tolerant/caring perceptive? I think.. clearly not! But because of the tasks in life they are carrying out, they are having all sorts of attitudes and desire imposed on them that are just not true. And what happened with that exchange? It didn't go the way someone was expecting so suddenly we got given the qualities of obnoxious and spiteful.

And of course… all the men and women not fulfilling the stereotypical roles are having all sorts of irrelevant and untrue attributes and attitudes ascribed to them.

What I don't understand is this: observe the people you know… are all, or even the majority, of them meeting the full criterium for the stereotypes even when they are carrying out stereotypical tasks? I would be really surprised if the answer was yes. The example given earlier was a great one: aggression and violence are NOT the same thing. More men are violent than women. Are men necessarily (i.e. inherently) more aggressive than women? Do we not have clear evidence in our everyday life that different people are affected by "sex hormones" differently?

Not sure if it's relevant to the thread, but I remember being very struck when at a local social club, a bunch of us were sitting with some older men (guys in their 70s and 80s) and during the conversation it came up that one of the guys was considering becoming a stay-at-home dad, or at least going part-time so his Dw could go full time

They don't breed them harder than the guys we were sitting with (there was at least one ex-whaler, the rest were ex-merchant seamen) so we expected some ribbing, but they seemed really impressed, and said
how much harder (!!!) it was for young families today (from guys who spent 18 months at sea) and wished our pal all the best.

I swear this guy took more shit from guys in our age range, some quite mean-spirited.

a bunch of us were sitting with some older men (guys in their 70s and 80s) and during the conversation it came up that one of the guys was considering becoming a stay-at-home dad… I swear this guy took more shit from guys in our age range, some quite mean-spirited

Yes, I think it's highly relevant that, only when life becomes short, do most of us realise we shouldn't be doing shit we don't want to do because of our gender and just doing what we want to do (within the parameters of what we are able to do).

I don't know - these guys were so supportive and (I think) maybe a bit sad that they didn't have the chances we had for family life. Whereas other people who have by comparison had life handed to them were dismissive of this guy's plans.

^ well then… it just goes to show, as has been said many time on this thread, how damaging gender stereotypes are for men.

I don't know

So we're all clear...

the majority of supportive men were in their 70s and 80s?

The majority of the 'mean-spirited' stuff came from the younger men?

That's what I read from your post…?! And so what I responded to..?!

No, that's totally right. I was surprised, but I guess that these guys had lived a bit, had daughters with careers, etc. and could see further through a brick wall than some.

The mean spirited stuff was just basically stuff about aprons and feather dusters. Nothing sinister, but still.

I fucking hate tidying and "keeping house", I'm rubbish at cleaning, I don't do very much cooking at home, DH does most of the childcare and I earn about 5 times more than DH in a stressful corporate job.

I must be a man!!

I have done a lot of work involving cooking, cleaning and DIY, as has my DH - I've earned good money and references from it and been proud of being good at one of the things I'm good at… for me, it's a whole different ball game when it's your own home that needs 'looking after'.

As a feminist, I have no problem with people choosing to be a SAHP, (though I find it irritating that people so doing want to justify their choices as natural, it does so many of us a huge disservice and makes both our working lives and personal relationships more difficult to negotiate). The problem I have with SAHP is how massively vulnerable you are on that situation. If you or your partner changes your mind about the marriage, and you've SAH, you'll have no rights to the lifestyle or finances that you enabled your partner to achieve. You'll get half the marital assets, and financial support for any children but you will be expected to provide for yourself, which will mean returning to work after potentially twenty or so years out of the workplace. You'll have sacrificed your earning potential to your partner's and your partner will not owe you a thing for it. You will be permanently disadvantaged by this. If you choose to leave, you'll be giving up more than the relationship; if they choose to leave it would be more than emotionally devastating.

The other thing I wanted to comment on is martial arts as an 'outlet'. I think it's probably more complicated than 'men have violent urges they need to express'. I think you can't ignore that violence is a socially constructed marker for masculinity, and it's often the only option for socially disadvantaged men who don't have access to status jobs but do have a cultural investment in powerful masculinity. So a martial arts environment provides a way of achieving masculine respectability which is less (self) destructive than delinquency (which also has a particular association with masculine 'risk taking' or maverick self-governance).

It's really not just a question of male violence finding an outlet, you can't overlook issues of respectability and masculine identity at work. This would be in my mind how patriarchy damages or limits men and boys, too. We make the fields for masculine achievement horribly competitive and brutal, so men who invest in masculine identity have a brutal time. Feminism is for them, too, though personally I campaign directly on issues that affect women.