"Bright" women

[PerspicaciaTick]

In all the discussions in the media about Labour's new shadow cabinet, I've heard a lot of comments describing the women as bright, as in "she's a very bright woman" or "she is very bright and able". It is obviously supposed to be complimentary and to say that the speaker believes the woman is competent but I can't remember ever hearing a grown man being described as "bright". Usually a man would be described as clever.
So, I was wondering if you think this is because cleverness in a woman is too threatening (so the softer " bright" gets used instead) or if women's intelligence simply isn't seen as equal to a man's.

Are they really describing adult women as 'bright'? I have only ever heard it used of a child.

Can you give specific examples OP? I have a feeling you are, but I can't find any.

Bright also carries the meanings of shiny and happy so gives a certain upbeat decorativeness to the subject as well, perhaps? Not that I really think that description applies to many front bench politicians of any persuasion.

I can't remember the exact details, it was on R4 while the shadow cabinet was being appointed. I think that on one occasion Kerry McCarthy was being discussed. Another time was someone else... possibly Maria Eagle. Problem is that I have R4 on 24x7 so can't remember exactly what programme.
I'm glad to see that it really isn't OK.

You're right, the usage is gendered. I've never noticed before because usually I've been relieved they're actually noticing a woman's intellectual ability rather than how she looks!

Bright is fine for children and probably OK for students. I can imagine using it for a first year trainee of either sex but it would cover more than just being clever and wander into the territory of enthusiastic/keen/shows a willing attitude.

Basically if a adding "young" after bright makes no sense in relation to the person being described then it's patronising.

I refer to children as bright - like Buffy says it's to do with potential.

I was then thinking about work - I work with a lot of women who could be described as very "bright" women. And I suppose it's got the socialisation edge in there. So the men who I work with who program and do code all day - well obviously they're clever but they aren't "bright" - they aren't engaged, interested, enthusiastic, careful how they phrase things & etc

I would never describe an adult man as bright, even if he met those things.

So yes it is inappropriate probably for an adult but interestingly IME at work it's not enough for the women to be clever, they have to be clever +++++ AKA "bright" and that sort of shows it up.

Interesting thread.

I'd agree, bright does have connotations of shiny, perky, and decorative along with being clever.

I couldn't imagine using it for anyone over the age of about 16, unless tongue in cheek. It would be really quite patronising.

I've heard it used at work, often about relatively young women. Also hear "sharp", which is sometimes also used about men, when used about women it seems to mean she is clever and not sufficiently people-pleasing to be called "bright".

It's 'little miss clever' turned into 'bright' to bring it up to the 21st century.

I've copied this:

clever
?kl?v?/Submit
adjective
1.
quick to understand, learn, and devise or apply ideas; intelligent.
"she was an extremely clever and studious young woman"
synonyms: intelligent, bright, smart, brilliant
antonyms: stupid
skilled at doing or achieving something; talented.
"he was very clever at getting what he wanted"
synonyms: skilful, dexterous, adroit, deft, nimble, nimble-fingered, handy, adept; More
showing skill and originality; ingenious.
"a simple but clever idea for helping people learn computing"
synonyms: shrewd, astute, sharp, acute, quick, sharp-witted, quick-witted.

Note:

"she was an extremely clever and studious young woman"

Sorry to multiple post but all I did was google "clever synonyms" and this is what came up first.

ah

google says

intelligent and quick-witted.
"she was amiable, but not very bright"
synonyms: clever, intelligent, sharp, quick-witted, quick, smart, canny, astute, intuitive, acute, alert, keen, perceptive, ingenious, inventive, resourceful, proficient, accomplished, gifted, brilliant; informalbrainy, genius; informalwhip-smart
"a bright young graduate"

Interesting that the example there is of a female.

Actually I have heard my parents others say "he's not very bright" so they apply the negative to men and women both. So, not sure what that means

Broadening the discussion a bit (but hopefully not a derail) - I think the 'potential' thing is important and gendered precisely because it slots women into the role of listening awe-stricken to older, male mentors about largely tactical and strategic matters, in which they are assumed to be inexperienced. Their intelligence then becomes a non-threatening foil to an older male counterpart.

'Intellectual', on the other hand, suggests that the woman might actually know something, might be an expert, and might indeed exceed that older mentor in her capabilities - and that she is therefore a threat. And as for 'genius' - there's a long tradition of associating women with caring, socially reproductive roles that are antithetical to the kind of eccentricity and focus that have been suggested by that word since the romantic era (and, I would argue, that is part of its point as a word - to delimit and to exclude).

Yes, shove the holly think you're right about the "potential" element.

Oh shovetheholly don't get me started on 'genius' - that's a rigged term if ever there was one. A man can be a genius or a maverick or a revolutionary. A woman with the attributes of 'genius' and a non-feminine set of abilities, with a dose of 'eccentric' behaviour and single-minded focus, is now suddenly being 'diagnosed' as being on some form of autistic spectrum when all she is doing is not conforming to traditional gender roles.

While Aspergers/autism diagnosis can be a positive thing in many ways, I really do think we need to develop a considered, critical feminist viewpoint on Aspergers diagnosis as a counter to the tendency to pathologise everyone who doesn't conform to expected social standards.

I agree Buffy, except I don't see it necessarily as a feminist issue. The pathologising of traits that seem to me entirely within the range of normal humanisation is something I've railed against before. At the risk of pressing the 'men get this too!' button, it, er, happens to men too, and is stigmatising and unhelpful.

the dancingbear it is feminism that is largely responsible for analysing and questioning feminine and masculine gender expectations, for the simple reason that it is women who are on the sharp end of those expectations. Men do lose out, but not in such a material and measurable way. It is women who consistently lose out on opportunities for success because their attributes are seen as problematic.

Completely understood wol1968. Is your position that a woman with the same 'autistic' traits (nb. the scare quotes) as a man would be more likely to be diagnosed? I'm not disputing that is the case btw, and it would be interesting if it were. Sounds like there's a PhD for someone there.

My position is that a man with some 'autistic' traits may, given the right kind of occupation and social climate, be accepted for what he is and escape the need for diagnosis altogether. A woman with the same traits will get a hard time socially, and have narrower educational and vocational outlets for her often very particular skills, with resulting damage to her self-esteem. Which will increase the likelihood of a diagnosis of some sort, not necessarily Aspergers.

autistic traits in women are considered much more problematic

Or possibly just 'masculine' ones?

So, the theory goes, women develop more effective coping strategies, because the penalties are higher for girls than boys.

Women who have difficulty joining in socially will often learn very effectively over time to mask that difficulty, which, paradoxically, demonstrates a very high level of social awareness, albeit perhaps of a more intellectual than instinctive nature. So here's my question. Are 'normal' (or should I say NT) people's social skills really 'skills' or merely a by-product of thinking the same way, and talking the same language, as everybody else? And to what extent are 'AS' women's social difficulties created by the larger community's lack of imagination and inability to empathise with them?

So, women present differently, often in a way that precludes diagnoses (and DDA protection etc) for them.

Here's where you can see me suck my cheeks in as I try and pinpoint what makes me uneasy about seeking a diagnosis. 'Diagnosis' implies being officially stigmatised and set apart, which is the price you pay for legal protection. Ostensibly, the protection is there to compensate for the discrimination you get in the wider community; however, the perception of the community is that being labelled will rubber-stamp their continued treatment of you as not quite a proper member of the human race. It is a convenient way of appearing to allow for diversity while ensuring that people who don't conform are kept in their hutch and never allowed real power to influence society at large.

What worries me is that women who challenge the status quo for female behaviour, who don't share typically feminine interests and styles of interaction, and who get socially punished for their difference, may end up with the double whammy of sexism and disablism. Instead of being called mad (as in the 19th century), they're called autistic, when actually, their real problem is sexism.

...having a near-perfect memory for language, so being able to identify inconsistencies in what they say from one occasion to the next. Handy tip - it is better to remain silent on the subject of said inconsistencies.

Sounds like you've been emotionally bullied and gaslighted in your time. From their point of view, someone who remembers what you said better than you do, and who has better technical language skills than you do, is bound to be a threat. That's a reflection on the ignorant, bigoted people you've been around, not on you. In everyday situations where there aren't going to be major repercussions over what you say, there's a lot to be said for speaking up and not giving a flying fuck what people think.

I'd normally say sorry for the essay, but I think this board is a bit different.