Recently I have found my feminist beliefs to be in jeopardy.

I am not one of those strident, burn-your-bra feminists, I am not the type who thinks women should be spelled "womyn". In no way, shape or form am I a feminazi, since I don't think such a creature exists, and if she did, would she announce to a lift full of men that her £70 jeans make her ass look fantastic? Or would that be counter-feminist, since perpetuating the objectification of a woman is the height of iniquitous?

As I have said in the past, I used to be a real man-hater in university. That's "man-hater", not feminist, since the two actually, I think, are not inclusive of each other. Feminists, I believe, think that man and woman co-exist in society and can be seperate but equal in perhaps seperate but un-equal ways-if the woman is the one in charge of child care, then the man can be in charge of car maintenance. Or vice versa. If the woman cooks, the man does the dishes. Or maybe they take turns. Bottom line-no single job is "just the woman's" or "just the man's". Chores suck equally for both sexes.

A man-hater, which is what I was, wants to round up all the men and house them in Nevada, where they can trade sexual favors to the women who run the world in exchange for one hour in a climate-controlled room.

I got over that. Honest. What I am now, is an I-wanna-work-and-have-a-man-and-a-family-and-keep-my-own-name kind of gal. You know. A modern woman.

That's spelled W-O-M-A-N woman, not the other kind.

But recently I have found myself questioning the very basics of my feminism. Is what I used to believe still relevant? And why did I choose to only see parts of it?

This entire week I have to be in London every day, and as such, it means a one-hour train ride in to the city, and a one-hour train ride home. I have this down to an art form. I know how to manage this trip as well as I know how to insert tampons these days. But I had a twist yesterday which made me pause and, riding the train, I put my book down and simply thought about this issue the rest of the journey.

When I get on my train stop, the train is generally empty. It fills up about two stops before London, and from then on, it's standing room only. As we pulled into the last stop before London, a little station called Woking, a surge of people came on, crowding around me and the three men sitting next to me. The last one on the train was a very pregnant woman, one hand protectively resting on her stomach. She pulled the train door behind her, and the three men beside me looked up at her, pulled their newspapers in, and made room with their knees for her and her enormous stomach to stand.

For a pregnant woman.
To stand.
On a shifting train ride that would take another 20 minutes.

I immediately stood up and offered her my seat, which she gratefully accepted and sat down, taking her shoes off and rubbing her stomach. And I stood there in the aisle, trying to hold my balance, and I was really angry. I was livid, as three average, healthy, ordinary male commuters refused to give up their seats for a pregnant woman. The nerve! The disgust! So I had to do it, and I'm a woman!

Hang on a minute.
I'm a woman.
And I'm annoyed that these men wouldn't give up their seats, with the underlying thought that they should have given up their seats, since they're men.
The implication being that I shouldn't have to give up my seat, these men should have.

And it was then I realized that if I want seperate but equal, I need to shut the fuck up and give up my seat to someone who needs it, too. The boats don't need to rescue women and children foremost, they just need to rescue the children first. They don't need to make the men stand on the deck, looking forward to an icy dunk, since as a woman today, we too can tread the freezing water. The days of damsels in distress and rescuing the lost woman are over-we no longer need to be rescued since we're fair and delicate, or since we are the reproductive members of society. The population is pretty healthily high, and I can kick Best Friend's ass at boxing, proving that I am pretty hearty myself.

It's the same with work-my male colleagues tell dirty jokes, they swear, and I swear back at them. If I thought they crossed a line, I'd say so. With the exception of Von PettyPumpkin, they're all good guys who work pretty hard and like a laugh, a pint, and the ability to chill in front of their colleagues. And at work, I want equal treatment, too-I want the same workload as the men (in fact, I like a heavy workload, so go ahead and add more). I like to be paid the same and I like to know my chances of moving ahead are the same as everyones (in fact my manager has asked if I want to be a line manager, to replace him when he leaves in two years. The answer is "no".)

But a recent article in the Times has pissed me off pretty severely. Apparently, women aren't facing a glass ceiling anymore-we're facing a glass cliff. A glass cliff. Like looking up at the bottom of a shoe wasn't bad enough.

According to the Times,:

"...the glass cliff phenomenon, in which the women who did crack the glass ceiling found themselves in a constant struggle to maintain their success."

Wait for it.

"Companies that appoint women to leadership positions often tend to do so when the business is performing poorly, according to the study. This made it significantly harder for female executives and managers to do well because they were regularly blamed for failures that had begun before they started work."

Ah. So is the implication here that people look for a bad-odds horse to blame, a way of pointing the finger? Things are sucking, let's bring a woman here, crucify her, then get a good-old-boy here to rescue the situation? To get a woman to take the "poisoned chalice", as the Times calls it, when a man wouldn't?

But is it perhaps because it's the nature of women to see broken things and want to fix them, to be able to knuckle down at the bow of jobs simply because, based on biology, we're better equipped for the itchy veil martydom? Is it perhaps due to the fact that, with business, women can rule with their head just as well as with their heart? Surely that can't be the only time they give the big captain's cap to a woman, when the boat is looking to capsize and take the crew with her?

I utterly reject that women are facing a glass cliff. I think instead that what some women like is a good challenge, we like to turn things around, we like to be able to see change. Why does the metaphor have to be something that we're pushed from? Why "glass cliff", why not "glass starting block"? Because the truth is, as a follow-up article in the Times showed:

"It turns out that in the five months after the appointment of women, the share prices of those companies in the study did what dark horses always do: outperformed the average."

Amen, my sistuhs.

Now if the Times can help me figure out my stance on men versus women accommodating on trains, then perhaps I can quit taking a lighter up to my lingerie drawer, wondering which filigree lace edge to burn first.

-H.

PS-I will say this again-I don't do politics here. In fact, I don't read about politics anywhere in blogdom. This isn't a "head in the sand" approach-this is a "life is too short to be so pissed off, and I'm grown-up enough to form my own opinions, thanks" approach. You think a chick like me goes around without opinions on the world theater? Me? A chick with a view on everything from love to breakfast cereal to flag waving to books? I turn to blogdom to meet people-kind, funny, warm, loving, hilarious. People. Check out my links for some of them. I turn to the BBC, Radio 4 and discussions with Mr. Y to determine my politics. Life's too short to walk away from someone you love just because of their politics. So if I don't comment on your political posts, or if I don't blog about politics, don't assume it's because I am an imbecile. It's mostly because of my ulcer, and the fact that the ass bleed needs to stop someday.

PPS-I am closing all my old comments down, posts will only stay open about a week-twice in two weeks I have been hit by spam, I have deleted over 400 comments and I just can't take them. Old posts will have comments closed. I hate spam with a vile rage.

PPPS-That screeching sound you hear? It's coming from Houston. It's Emily, giddy with excitement, who will be here in 2 days time. She can prove, once and for all, that I am not a professional writer (I just play one on tv), that I am not a balding man in Ohio, and that I am exactly as I say I am.

Unless it goes all Griffin and Sabine, in which we are in different dimensions and can only communicate via surreal home-drawn postcards. Then I'm screwed. I can't draw.

Posted by: Everydaystranger at 07:19 AM | Comments (32) | Add Comment
Post contains 1656 words, total size 9 kb.

1 I've taught my children to get up for older people, and I have always stood up for a pregnant woman (unless I was in a similar situation myself.) To me the rule is not male/female but the health/age/ability/encumberment of the person getting on the bus/train. The same applies to opening the door for someone. I think a lot of this boils down to simple politness; smiling and thanking the clerk who rings up your groceries, or saying a word or two to the person who takes your toll money. Picking up an object that falls from the ground and putting it back on the shelf, or handing it to the owner. Helping someone find the peanut butter ailse. It has nothing to do with being a feminist. It is a matter of respecting one's fellow human being. Oh, and while I do cover politics on my blog, I agree with you in terms of anger regarding politics. I feel one needs to argue the ideas and not demean the people. And I didn't ascribe any lack of intelligence on your part to the lack of politics on your blog or in your comments. (Ps, before we take Emily's word that you are real don't we have to have proof that Emily is real? ;-) )

Posted by: Rachel Ann at September 14, 2004 07:56 AM (Ws8TX)

2 Rachel Ann-I do completely agree with you-the able-bodied should be the ones to stand, absolutely.

Posted by: Helen at September 14, 2004 07:58 AM (/uGVk)

3 Damn. Rachel Ann said what I wanted to say, except she probably said it better.

Posted by: RP at September 14, 2004 11:15 AM (X3Lfs)

4 To be honest, I've gotten annoyed with a situation like that before too. It actually offends me completely to walk onto a train and find a pregnant woman standing. I will be one of those seat hogs for the sole purpose of getting her to sit down if necessary. I'd like to think alot of the men that don't give up their seat just didn't notice because they were in their own little world. Living in DC, what I find very amusing is the number of men that actually get up for women, elders, etc that happen to be military. I'm not sure what it is. But I have never seen a military man sitting if there was a woman, elder, or even small children standing. Maybe it's the whole wanting to serve mentality?

Posted by: Jadewolff at September 14, 2004 01:24 PM (8MfYL)

5 The problem is, women cannot have it both ways. It is very unfair to call ourselves "equal" to men and then expect them to treat us differently. But, I am very anti-feminist, so my opinion is skewed. And no, I am not a dumb bimbo, I actaully have a PhD in Physics.

Posted by: Marie at September 14, 2004 01:35 PM (dxWfW)

6 Any man who doesn't give up his seat for a pregnant woman or his place on a life raft for a woman or child (in the famous words of Major Payne) "should be monkey stomped and have his brains mailed back to his mama." Men should make life good for women!! If it means giving up your seat, holding a door, telling someone she looks nice, sacrificing his life, or any of those time-honored traditions, DO IT MEN!! And "not noticing" a pregnant woman is as lame as not giving up your seat for her. Don't make me back up the dump truck and unload what I really think

Posted by: Solomon at September 14, 2004 01:50 PM (k1sTy)

7 "Men should make life good for women!!" Ahhhhhhh.....

Posted by: Helen at September 14, 2004 02:06 PM (/uGVk)

8 Anyone who continues to sit while a pregnant woman stands is probably an asshole. I think I already gave you the quote from RAH about women and equality, so I won't repeat it here. And you've already made your point about politics (or the lack thereof) on your blog so I assume the repeat is for those who still don't get it. For the spam problem, may I suggest: http://www.anti-leech.com/spam/spambot_stopper.php If you make this a link on your page, it should catch most of the spider programs looking to spam you. Works like a charm on all of my sites. If you want to know more you can check out: http://www.anti-leech.com/

Posted by: EAsy at September 14, 2004 02:28 PM (U89mk)

9 I guess I'm still a bit chauvinist because I think each of those three guys should have been smacked on the backside of the head. Twice. With the Sunday edition of the Times. Holding doors, holding chairs, walking on the side next to the street, getting your ass out of the damned seat...these are things that I learned growing up. It's how a gentleman behaves, period. It doesn't mean that guys are superior to the women they help in these little ways, it means they respect them and have a little care for some of the traditions that actually make polite society a little nicer.

Posted by: Jim at September 14, 2004 02:48 PM (GCA5m)

10 Dude. The squealing has been non stop for at least 48 hours now. See... it may be 2 days until I get there, but only ONE DAY until I leave. Eeeeeee! I leave tomorrow! Eeeeeeee!

Posted by: emily at September 14, 2004 03:26 PM (GpAPK)

11 I find myself disagreeing with Jim and Solomon, and agreeing with Marie. Women can't have it both ways: either you don't want special treatment, or you do. Not wanting the bad special treatment, aka discrimination, while insisting on the good special treatment, aka gentlemanly behaviour, strikes me as hypocritical. That said, those three guys need to get hit in the nads, hard. Not because they were men who didn't offer their place to a woman, but, as Rachel Ann said, because they were healthy, able-bodied people who didn't offer their place to a very pregnant woman.

Posted by: Gudy at September 14, 2004 03:59 PM (xhbdq)

12 I, too, am non-political, blog-wise. And rarely do I comment on political entries. (There is one blogger that I make exception to that rule for, but I always tell him I'm not going to argue, and just that I dislike his generalizations about others not of his political bent.) I guess I'm chauvenistic, or old-fashioned, or non-liberated, or something, though, because I would have stood, given the pregnant lady a place to sit, and then proceeded to give those men what-for during the rest of the trip.

Posted by: scorpy at September 14, 2004 04:00 PM (s1gnv)

13 It's not even so much that the men wouldn't give up their seat because they're men, it's that their mother never taught them the manners to be courteous, in any situation. You were taught manners. I mean, sure we'd like to point fingers and say, "oh but it's because they were men." Would you have felt the same way if it were an old frail woman, or an old frail man that they did the same thing to? It's people in general these days that are completely inconsiderate of others. "I am a paying commuter too, and I was here first. Who cares if the old man breaks a hip, pregnant woman falls, etc." It's really sad.

Posted by: sporty at September 14, 2004 04:00 PM (NsnoE)

14 Why can't we (society) have it both ways? Give women equal pay for equal work, give them equal opportunities, allow them the right to vote, and all the other stuff that would make them "equal", and still treat them like ladies? Just because she wants the same workload & pay at work means we can't stand up when she needs a seat? I'm still in favor of separation of roles (that will never change ; but in the absence of that, I will still make life good for women and children and sacrifice my comfort for theirs.

Posted by: Solomon at September 14, 2004 04:33 PM (k1sTy)

15 The problem is, it is now risky for a gentleman to BE a gentleman. My wonderfuly hubby got cursed out by a woman for holding the door open for her. Some feminists consider chivalry highly insulting and get downright nasty about it. Women like that have ruined it for people like that poor pregant woman Helen got up for. For the record, unless I was pregnant, I always gave my seat to the elderly, infirm or pregnant.

Posted by: Marie at September 14, 2004 04:35 PM (dxWfW)

16 Ok, just got back from Court. On the journey back to the office, on the #4 Train (Lexington Avenue Express), I saw a man get up and offer up his seat to a woman with a small child in tow. At least sometimes in NY the niceties are observed.

Posted by: RP at September 14, 2004 04:52 PM (LlPKh)

17 Solomon’s got it right. The fact that women and men are equals (or should be...) has got nothing to do with men being kind to women. The women figures in my life (grandmother, mother, wife...) simply leave me with no other way to act, it wont even cross my mind not to give my seat or open a door to a women, and of course to elders or disabled. Pregnant women are therefore a powerful combination ;-). The fact is I feel good paying that courtesy. And I generally get a smile back. But I´m from a conservative country, so... Miguel. P. S. – It´s my birthday, congratulate me. Just don´t tell me 30 is the beginning of the end, that I´m getting fat and old… I´ve heard it all before!

Posted by: msd at September 14, 2004 04:53 PM (DsbnL)

18 i've been thinking about this stuff a lot lately. whoever said it has more to do with manners is right on. helen, as usual, you put so eloquently much of what's on my mind.

Posted by: kat at September 14, 2004 04:53 PM (QkuGS)

19 MSD! You're alive! You've been quiet! And happy birthday. Believe me-30 is fun!

Posted by: Helen at September 14, 2004 05:06 PM (/uGVk)

20 Long time no hear from, Miguel. Welcome back and HAPPY BIRTHDAY!! 30 isn't the beginning of the end; it just keeps getting better. And for what it's worth, I don't think you're getting fat

Posted by: Solomon at September 14, 2004 06:46 PM (k1sTy)

21 I'm with you on political blogs, Helen. It's like sports blogs; I'm glad the people who write them and argue about them enjoy all that, but I already know where I stand politically. I don't need to read constant debate over such things. When Dan and I went to the airshow a few weeks ago, we had to take a shuttle bus from the parking lot to the airport. It was crowded, so Dan and I had to stand. Three men jumped up to offer me their seat. I'm not pregnant and I'm not feeble. I'm assuming they did it because all the other women were sitting and I was the only one standing. I thanked them but said no; it was a 5 minute ride at most. But I was touched they stood up and offered. I always am. I don't see that kind of thing as some kind of statement that I, as a woman, am too weak to stand up on my own, or too stupid to open my own door, or too ditsy to handle this kind of thing on my own, but rather I see it as an echo of the ancient human recognition that I have a value men can never have: I can bear children. Rather than that fact being an insult to me, I believe it is meant as an honor. A special respect. Whether I'm actually capable of bearing children or not is not the issue; It's traditional, it's respectful and the impulse for men to show such respect towards women goes far back in our history in many cultures. Since such respect is given to me as an honor, I accept it as such. With equal respect and courtesy in return.

Posted by: Amber at September 14, 2004 07:29 PM (zQE5D)

22 I think there are really three issues; politness, equal opportunity and proper behaviour. One gives up their seat to someone who needs it more than oneself because that is what is decent and good. A man may help on a woman with her coat because that is a social nicety and it hurts no-one to do. It isn't necessary in my book but it isn't something one should become upset over if it is done (and any woman who gets bent out of shape for such a gesture has peanuts for brains. The gentleman who opend the door for her or whatever, can just smile and know he behaved nicely) Neither really has anything to do with how much one gets paid at work. I do a job I should get paid for that job according to the value of my work; my gender (race, creed, etc. etc.) should not be an issue. As far giving me a seat on the lifeboat...lets pray that is a never again occurance... everyone should have a seat on the lifeboat...

Posted by: Rachel Ann at September 14, 2004 07:56 PM (Ws8TX)

23 MT blacklist or whatever it is.. comment spam killer.

Posted by: pylorns at September 14, 2004 08:26 PM (FTYER)

24 ..update... Luuka has landed in SE Tennessee... safe, well, and hungry...

Posted by: Eric at September 14, 2004 11:10 PM (Py0cM)

25 I want to rule the world. I want my husband to squish all the bugs and open doors for me. I want to be celebrated at work for the fact that my heart tends to lead my head in the proper direction, 99,9% of the time, thus making me an effective leader of people and generator of ideas. I want to be whistled at by the construction crew working on the roadway outside my office. I want to cook, clean, and otherwise tend my little family. I want breakfast in bed. I want it all. I am W-O-M-A-N. Hear me roar.

Posted by: Jennifer at September 14, 2004 11:21 PM (vSro2)

26 So if I don't comment on your political posts, or if I don't blog about politics, don't assume it's because I am an imbecile. I would never assume you're an imbecile, unless you acted like one, and even then I'd probably figure you were just inebriated. But seriously, I certainly hope I've never, even inadvertently, made you feel that way. I have folks who read me to see me rave about my silly, limited interests, and I have folks who read for the politics, and so far as I'm concerned, it's ALL good. I'm just amazed I have anyone reading me for any reason. I've had those "wait, why'm I expecting the guy to do that?" moments too. Equal rights implies equal responsibility is how I normally look at it, but shoot, that doesn't mean I don't get all aflutter with girlish delight when a man holds open a door or offers me a seat, because I sure do.

Posted by: ilyka at September 15, 2004 12:00 AM (uJDHV)

27 wow, someone actually missed me! I stop by almost daily, but have been quiet on the comments. Thank you for your kind words. By the way, I´m still waiting for Luuka! All the best, Miguel.

Posted by: msd at September 15, 2004 12:17 AM (oo2TN)

28 Jennifer's post pretty much exemplifies what I hate about feminists and feminism. *I* want....*I* want it all. And damn it, someone should give it to me. I want to act like a man, but be treated like a woman. I want, I want, I want. Ridiculous. No-one can have it all, male or female. And what's with this "I am woman hear me roar"? Fine, roar away. But open your own doors and squish your own bugs, honey.

Posted by: Marie at September 15, 2004 12:34 AM (dxWfW)

29 I thought Jennifer's comments fit in perfectly with how I see my life and my needs. And I have a Champion Bug-Squisher. Plus an awesome job I adore where I get to tell everyone else what to do. Guess I do have it "all". Must be luckier than I thought. HA! Although nobody would *ever* call me a feminist. Not in a million years. *laughs at the thought* Me going to a feminist meeting would be like Michael Moore showing up at the Republican Convention to make a speech. Not a pretty sight, folks. Uh-uh. ;-)

Posted by: Amber at September 15, 2004 02:36 AM (zQE5D)

30 I had the same kind of moment, when I ealized it was about being equal and treated as such, and nothing else. I am feminine, but I can do what ever it is that I want. Which like you means to me I can be a moderate modern woman. Now to make a list for you and Emily...

Posted by: stinkerbell at September 15, 2004 09:16 AM (HhU+M)

31 That Marie thinks me a feminist shows she missed the point of my comments entirely. I'm a woman. Period. A forty-one year old one, at that, who can honestly assess life by saying I pretty much *do* have it all. And just because I *want* it, doesn't mean I'm asking someone to hand it to me on a silver platter. I've worked for every piece of it. Which makes it that much more satisfying.

Posted by: Jennifer at September 15, 2004 11:28 AM (vSro2)

32 I like your stance. If you want the pregnant lady to have your seat, give it up. However, any man who saw that lady and didn't give up his seat is a fucking twit and deserves your evil eye. In a predominently male career-path, I have had as many female bosses and co-workers as I have had male. I don't believe in the glass cliff because that would suggest that companies are willing to lose money to prove a point. However, I've seen first-hand the good-ol-boy's network and there's no denying that being a feminine woman is still seen as a weakness. Smart companies know better though. Smart people know better.

Posted by: Almost Lucid (Brad) at September 21, 2004 02:45 PM (oDYrr)

Hide Comments | Add Comment