I do some talking-much of it tongue-in-cheek, but some of it serious-around here about, for lack of better words, "girlishness" and "boyishness." It's something that's important to me on many levels and in many ways.
In my entertainment, I like smart, headstrong female characters (see: Hermione in the Potter movies). I also like these qualities in my friends and lovers. I hope those of you who've been reading this blog for a while would agree that my liking for those qualities is reflected in many of the posts in it.
Of course, they're also what I like to write, and have always liked to write, in my female characters. Something that I really like about writing Keitha, Annabel and Colley is that to different degrees, all of them are about the masculine in the feminine, and vice-versa.
As I discussed recently, one of my favorite television shows is Gilmore Girls, and Amy Sherman-Palladino one of my favorite television writers (going back to Roseanne). Lisa is my favorite Simpson. Like everybody else in America, I'm in love with Chloe on 24.
Yet as we've seen, I also bristle at the notion, seemingly held by some, that having a vagina automatically makes one better than having a penis. Related to this is what I perceive as an implication that no woman has ever hurt a man, men have only hurt women.
I'm here to tell ya: It ain't necessarily so. In my life, no men have ever hurt me the way some women have.
Also, I dislike what I see as a victimization of feminism. Where on the one hand women claim to want to fight their own battles and take on men on their own terms. Yet too many of 'em can't wait to run to daddy when the going gets tough.
Please note I am not speaking of "all" or even "most," simply, "too many."
I am a straight, single man, with all (or at least much) that that implies. For instance, I can't see that a woman posing for Playboy, for example, is an inherently oppresive (or do I mean oppresed?) act. I'm not saying I think it's a freeing act either, as some might argue. I think a nude woman is a nude woman, and any political context is in the eye of the beholder.
I think Holly Hunter is one of the best actresses around, and one of the smartest in her choice of roles. I also think she's a babe, and have enjoyed her nude scenes on that basis. Must these be opposing views?
Anyway, to make a long story short (too late): What all this is in aid of is that Echidine has a good entry in her blog on masculinity and femininity, and how we define them. I think you should go read it.
Now I'll leave you with this song by Joe Jackson...
2 comments:
Unfortunately, men like you are in a tenuous position. But remember, some women have been so victimized that they can't possibly see anything else.
As far as modeling for Playboy, it is oppressive because it is dehumanizing. But how come Botticelli's nudes are art? Because no one jerks off to them?
That seems kind of subjective.
And just to add to your factoids, the worst beating I ever got in my life was at the hands of another woman...so go figure.
I can see how some of the activities surrounding the Playboy mansion, the oldstyle clubs and for lack of a better word, the "lifestyle" could be dehumanizing. Making women dress as bunnies seems pretty clear-cut.
But the mere act of posing for a camera nude? Seems to me much more of a gray area.
Of course, one could argue that by posing the women are endorsing said lifestyle...
Post a Comment