It appears to me impossible that I should cease to exist,
or that this active, restless spirit,
equally alive to joy and sorrow, should be only organized dust...
Surely something resides in this heart that is not perishable.
--Mary Wollstonecraft
Did you know that it's Women's History Month? If you're feeling weary from the varied and relentless attacks on women's rights that we've come to call the "War on Women," it can be helpful to look back. I'm over at The Broad Side today, remembering Mary Wollstonecraft. Having grown up feeling like a lonely feminist, I eventually found an unlikely companion in the writing of this 18th Century radical who must have felt far more isolated than me.
You can read more about how she influenced me at Mary Wollstonecraft: Radical Feminist Then and Now.
In the meantime, I'd love to hear about your feminist inspirations! Is there a woman, past or present, who changed your world?
There is a woman, Jane Beard, a dear friend, who I admire for her well-rounded and matter of fact vitality in the world. She embodies balanced feminine and masculine qualities. She is soft, generous, nurturing and fiercely powerful and creative. She leads and follows with equal zeal and engagement. Always transformative, she changes the lives of those she encounters.
ReplyDeleteWhat I've noticed, is that so many "strong" women I know, women who've bucked the patriarchy, have done so by embodying masculine qualities and repressing feminine qualities. And I see many of these women now awakening the feminine power, not masculine power, within them. Sometimes, I call this Fierce Love. This woman yields tenderness as readily as a firestorm that no one should get in her way...and she can access both energies on the turn of a dime as the moment requires.
It's not just about gender, of course. Feminine qualities are strong, and necessary, and part of who we are. Just as masculine qualities are strong, and necessary, and part of who we are. May we all find that balance within, may society find that balance. I find it heart breaking, regularly, that globally we could diminish half of our people. It's crazy. It's as heart breaking for the boys taught to be violent and dominating as it is for the girls taught to be pretty and quiet and subservient.
Thank you for writing about Wollstonecraft, never heard of her. And for always carrying this torch of equality. You are very much not alone and I hope more become vocal!
Hey Meredith - your friend sounds pretty cool!! And you sound very Wollstonecraftish: "May we all find that balance within, may society find that balance." And you're right, we don't need to repress our feminine side. That's what i did as a young girl (try to be like a boy instead of be a strong girl) - it's a nuanced but important distinction.
DeleteThere's always been gender-based pay discrimination in the workplace; it's just the absolute opposite of what most people believe. The fact is, women get paid the same for LESS work due to gender discrimination. In some cases, women also get paid MORE than men for the same amount of work.
ReplyDeleteI'll give you the holy grail of examples. Male and female tennis players receive equal prize money in grand slam tournaments, despite the fact that men play best of five set matches while women play best of three.
Now imagine this commonplace scenario in a grand slam final: two male players duke it out over a five set match, while the women's final goes for its maximum three sets. This means the women have played only three-fifths the amount of tennis that the men have played (60%). And the prize money is equal...
PROFESSIONAL FEMALE ATHLETES GET PAID THE SAME AMOUNT AS MALE ATHLETES FOR DOING ONLY 60% OF THE WORK THEY DO! WHY AREN'T THE FEMINISTS COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS! WHAT HAPPENED TO EQUAL PAY? AND IT DOESN'T END THERE. IMAGINE A FEMALE PLAYER WINNING IN STRAIGHT SETS (2 SETS) AND THE MEN PLAYING FIVE SETS. THE FEMALE PLAYERS STILL GET THE SAME PRIZE MONEY, DESPITE PLAYING JUST 40% OF THE TENNIS THE MEN HAVE PLAYED!
In the 2012 Australian Open, Victoria Azarenka received $2.3 million for winning the women's singles title. In doing so she played a total of just 15 GAMES in 7 tennis matches.
The men's 2012 Australian Open champion was Novak Djokovic, who also received $2.3 million but played 55 GAMES in 7 tennis matches.
These kind of disparities are an outrage. Male players are clearly working harder than the women and therefore deserve more money. This is also disenfranchising for the crowds who pay to watch these events because it will artificially inflate ticket prices as female athletes are being paid a disproportionately large sum of prize money (compared to male athletes) in relation to to the amount of revenue that they are actually generating for tournament organisers.
Now obviously the above is only a specific example in a professional sport. BUT I assure you that this same principle (women getting paid more for the same amount of work, or the same for LESS work) is actually apparent in MANY PROFESSIONS AND MANY FIELDS. Other fields where I have been exposed to this FIRST HAND are the police force and the military.
The whole concept of men being paid more is nothing but a feminist fairy tale.