I’m Baaaacckkk!

Now, how does anyone out there know this? Haven’t a clue, but this issue of the dance magazine has been “put to bed” (that’s publishing talk. heh), so now I can resume some of my other life pursuits, like blogging.
Actually, while I haven’t been posting here, I’ve been commenting intently and intensely on various blog and email conversations about sexism. My ire is stirred by that issue because I belive that expressed sexist attitudes (whether voiced in jest, conscious intent or even unconscious intent) contribute to the tough row that women have to hoe in this world by adding to the impression that it’s OK to demean women.) So, when I read Jennifer Balderama’s posts on the subjects of feminism and strong women, I figured that giving those posts some additional visibility was a good way to relaunch myself into the blogmix of things.
And, while I’m on the subject of gender differences (yes, all of this sexism stuff is somehow based in the different ways each gender needs to perceive the other, I believe), I found this very relevant passage in a “trashy” novel I just finished reading

that gave me a kind of “Aha!” Here’s the condensed passage: (It’s a novel written by a woman about a novel that’s being written by a man.)
“Women readers aren’t turned on by nice heroes any more than male readers lust after heroines who are too virtuous. There should be a hint, maybe at least a promise, of corruptibility.”
“You don’t have to worry about Roark in that regard. Women readers will love him…. He’s very male. His responses are intinctually masculine. He looks at everying in a sexual context first, before expanding his viewpoint to include other factors, like morality…… He declined her invitation to have sex, demonstating that he knows where the lines of decency are drawn.”
It seems to me that the same concept is often true in the non-fiction world. Men and women start out from different sexual/emotional places. And, if they’re “evolved” enough, expand their viewpoints so that their attitudes can meet up somewhere in the middle.
Many women tend to be initially attracted to “bad boy” men. But that attraction tends to be short-lived if the men don’t demonstrate that they know where the lines of decency are drawn.

1 thought on “I’m Baaaacckkk!

    Little girls are nice
    but we do them wrong
    fussing with their hair and dressing them up
    like dolls —
    teaching them from the start
    they are playthings.
    Better we should feed them
    words and numbers and tools
    to remind them
    that before women, they are people.
    Teach them love and caring and nurture, yes,
    but not as the entirety of their being,
    else those qualities become walls and prisons.
    Give them, as well, wings
    and teach them to fly —
    in case later in life
    someone builds walls around them.
    Little girls are nice,
    but daughters who are their soaring selves
    are better.

Leave a Reply