Monday, April 1, 1996
Loving sacrifices do not jeopardize feminist principlesWhen I get married, I want to take my husband's last name. Don't tell me I am giving in to a male-dominated society. Come on, it's the father's last name that many women insist they will retain or hyphenate. Besides, love and marriage are not about domination or whose surname reigns. Marriage is not the coexistence of two separate agendas. Marriage is unity and sacrifice. As Jonathan Richman sings, "In love you must surrender." Some people are too self-centered to realize that love requires submission.
Yes, I will be submissive to my husband in the loving sense of the word. Men and women should be submissive to each other. I'm saddened when I hear a woman proudly proclaim that she will not give an inch to her husband if it means sacrificing her own happiness. I know two couples who divorced because the wives refused to move when their husbands relocated to another state. That's not love except of oneself.
There is a fine line between giving in and not compromising what is truly important. The struggle for women is to balance pressures to succeed in both the career and family spheres. In the fight for social equality, some women get carried away and lose the ability to concede in personal relationships. Perhaps it is because they fear losing what women's liberation has gained.
I choose to separate my personal life from my political beliefs about gender issues. I won't mind changing my last name and becoming a part of the person I love. I like to shed my workplace toughness and feel protected and sheltered by him. I want him to be attracted to me and to treat me like a lady. Even though I struggle to be independent and strong, I admit it feels good to let go and depend on him, to have his arm around me and act like a little girl. But he had better beware, because sometimes that little girl becomes a raging feminist.
I don't even know what sets me off sometimes it's the most subtle of things. Like when a male companion forgets to introduce me to someone and I just stand there like one of his accessories. I hate when we both meet a guy at the same time, and only the men shake hands. I have to stick my hand out, or else I'm just a nonessential sidekick. Guys do this a lot. They don't even look women in the eye when they meet us. And if they do shake our hand, they grasp only our fingers and condescend to us with the most flimsy of gestures.
Some men prefer to sweep our arguments with a chuckle under the insulting and condescending PMS doormat rather than listen. They blame moodiness on the premenstrual syndrome: "Do you have PMS or something?" Big mistake. In a strained tone that suggests imminent trouble, I reply, "No, I do not (they're usually wrong). Are you trying to tell me that I don't have a valid reason to be angry? Are you ridiculing me? What? I don't have a good enough reason to be upset, so it must be biological?" I'm bothered when men try to explain away my anger as an effect of PMS.
And worse than these examples are those of inherent sexism thriving in today's society. Men continue to whistle at passing women and write songs that treat us as sex objects.
Catcalls are offensive. I do not understand how some men have the gall to whistle at a stranger, making her feel uncomfortable and degraded. These boors actually think hooting will attract a woman. Why is this behavior still acceptable? There would be universal outrage if racial slurs were yelled to passersby.
Songs can be more offensive than whistling. I went to the Campus Events Skafest last month and saw a band that I really enjoyed the Skeletones. I enjoyed them until I heard lyrics that went something like this: "I love to lick pussy." The song went on and on, mocking and defiling women. I stopped skanking and looked around at the men and women who should have been equally sickened.
How can men laugh and cheer and continue to dance to such a song? Why do men from an intellectual environment such as UCLA allow each other to get away with celebrating those lyrics? Where is political correctness in social settings? Why aren't men held responsible for their behavior toward women? There is something wrong here. There is no excuse in this day and age for men to go along with female objectification. Yet they do. I think many guys merely humor feminists, but inside they haven't really changed at all.
I have changed. I am more of a feminist now, after reading literature for my English major about women who break free from male bondage, women beaten by their husband or tormented by patriarchal constraints. I don't believe women should do the housework or serve men. Yet, I do believe that my future husband will lift the heavy things, kill the spiders and work on the car. So call me a hypocrite. I admit I subscribe to a double standard. However, there are some things I can do, but don't want to do.
I can open my own door, but I don't need to prove that. I'd much rather have my boyfriend respect me as a lady and treat me right. That includes opening doors, giving me his arm, not using vulgarity around me and respecting my beliefs. I expect these things and I believe that is a form of feminism in itself.
Some feminists want to erase all differences between men and women. However, if we are the same, then we are supplementary. I want to be more than replaceable. I want to be valued and needed for my unique qualities. Our differences should be embraced; men and women should be complementary. The difficulty is in deciding how. The personal duality I face between feminism and femininity relates to a larger picture. Working women don't want to sacrifice glamour and femininity for respect on the job. Yet, glamour essentially involves making yourself sexually attractive. How do we reconcile this?
Part of the answer lies in men. I don't care if women intentionally or unintentionally make themselves up to be attractive, men have no right to treat them as anything but fellow humans. Society has let men off the hook for too long, particularly in reference to songs, such as the Skeletones', and to sexual slurs that continue to exist as "jokes."
In the trial of equality, women have had the burden of proof. They have had to convince generally passive men of their female ability and equality. OK, OK; you're equal, say the men as they pass laws for us. But inside, men haven't actively changed, and this type of change is something neither legislation nor women can effect. It is time for men to become more responsible and to control their urges.
Many people don't even realize that they are sexist, but they need to catch themselves. I caught a male friend of mine complaining about a book. The protagonist detective was female, and he couldn't picture a woman in that role. It wasn't a woman that gave him his attitude. He needs to analyze himself and change why he thinks that way.
My boyfriend has it rough, because I demand gentlemanly behavior and I expect him to fulfill my feminist expectations. Sometimes I want him to baby me and care for me. Other times, I assert my independence and demonstrate how I don't need him. It feels right to empower myself with feminist thoughts and it also soothes me to surrender in love.
The feminist movement struggles with the same duality. Women are simultaneously pulled toward a new womanhood and toward the very human need to be cared for and wanted. Does independence from men make us truly happy? To survive, feminists will need to decide how to balance and define the changing role of women.
I can't iron out the contradictions within me. I admit, I want it both ways. My boyfriend's job is to read my mood and figure out how I want to be treated in each situation. I don't envy him, but then again, I'm ready to take his last name as my own.
Rich is a third-year English/American studies student and the assistant viewpoint editor. Her column appears on alternate Mondays.
Even though I struggle to be independent ... I admit it feels good to ... depend on him, to have his arm around me and act like a little girl.Comments to webmaster@db.asucla.ucla.edu