Well, that was interesting.
After my post “When Women Don’t Want Daughters” was picked up by Jezebel.com and seen by over 35,000 people, my relatively quiet internet existence ceased. For the most part, the reaction was positive, and readers used the article as a way to share their own desires and the reasons behind them. Several pointed out issues of race and sex preference that enlightened me. Some shared their own dysfunctional relationships with a mother or father, and their stories made my heart turn over in my chest. I enjoyed reading all of them, and I thank everyone who took the time to respond. It’s a thrill for any writer to see their words reach a wider forum, for author and readers alike to react, debate, learn.
There were, of course, a lot of angry comments, too – calling me rude and judgmental of women who wanted a particular sex over another. Some called me stupid. Mothers of sons were particularly offended, thinking that I had somehow targeted them for vitriol. Some mothers who have daughters but had originally wanted sons said I was accusing them of not loving their daughters enough, or at all.
I was called names – on (published and unpublished) comments here and elsewhere across the internet galaxy. People called me a “man hater,” “bitch,” and worse. The insults went downhill from there, becoming more sociopathic, disorganized, and delusional as the days wore on. I kept waiting to be lectured on the virtues of Huey Lewis and the News by someone named patrickbateman1. One person in the Men’s Rights Movement even posted a lengthy video response on YouTube, listing from a prewritten script all the reasons men had a more difficult existence than women, finishing the message with this succinct memo from her sons: “Fuck you.”
(For the record, I can’t at the moment; there’s an aspirin between my knees.)
The Jezebel article published on a Tuesday and exploded over the course of 24 hours both there and here. Because I have a full-time job that has nothing to do with this blog or my writing, I couldn’t chase the article and its comments all over the internet to interject, defend myself, or otherwise smooth ruffled feathers. Truth is, I stand by the original article and its basic tenets – that sex preference in and of itself is problematic, and that not wanting a daughter in a patriarchy is even more so.
I would, however, like to address some of the more vocal criticisms, if only because I’m a writer and writers have a particular addiction to being understood.
So, in no particular order:
- I don’t hate men; I’m married to one. I happen to think he’s the greatest person on the planet. Also: I think the patriarchy hurts men, too.
(By the way, these disclaimers are made anytime a feminist pokes at the patriarchy and the inevitable defensiveness occurs. They are tired refrains. They’re true for me, but they’re also so, so tired. I shouldn’t have to say these things when trying to discuss women’s issues. The “BUT WHAT ABOUT MEN??” hand-wringing is disruptive and can have the effect of closing down conversations. But I’m saying this anyway because there are boys and mothers of those boys in my life who will read this, and I love them.)
- Not wanting a daughter is different than wanting a particular sex. The former is the rejection of an entire sex, regardless of the reason. The latter is a desire for a particular sex due to preconceived ideas of what traits come along with it. To me, this is a fine distinction, but it was worth examining. And to me, the former is worse.
- The world is hard for all human beings. It’s inherently unfair, and people can be cruel. Some readers thought that I indicated the world wasn’t hard for men. I didn’t. I said that people think boys are easier to raise based on their sex. And I said the world was harder for women. Why? Here’s just a partial list:
- Men – almost all White – dominate at every conceivable level of power in this country. Men make up 83% of Congress. Men account for 97% of the chief executives of the 500 biggest U.S. companies; the remaining 3% of women CEOs have pay packages that are only about 85% of their male counterparts’ packages. (Yes, I know there’s a joke in there, but I’m trying to keep a straight face.) Of the 67 people Forbes ranked as the most powerful people in the world, three were women. The ability to be heard depends on having some degree of power. There are simply not enough women’s voices in places that matter. It’s how we got panels on birth control on Capitol Hill that looked like this and politicians sharing their thoughts on “honest rape.” Or why we’re not able to use the word “uterus” in a state legislature. Or my favorite, this WTFery. (As a reminder, it’s 2012.)
- And speaking of: we have yet to have a woman president. People are still asking this ridiculous question.
- Navigating the messages in the media directed at women is maddening and heartbreaking. Here are just a dozen examples of effed-up media messages directed at females. For a wonderful documentary on women’s portrayals within the media, I would recommend watching Missrepresentation. There’s also this, just for good measure.
- Not unrelated: 24 million people in the United States suffer from an eating disorder; 85-90% of those people are women.
- The wage gap still exists. The percentage points vary based on who interprets the data, but it averages at 78%. The gap is even higher the further up the pay scale you go. When over half of the population is women, and nearly 80% of those women will go on to have children, saying that the wage gap is due to women’s “lifestyle choices” is akin to saying that half of your workforce should be paid less because of their inherent ability to give birth. Even when controlling for certain factors that close up those percentage points to 85-90%, the point is: there shouldn’t be a wage gap.
- Women graduate from college in greater numbers than men. Yet men continue to dominate the majors that translate to the highest-paying fields. So if boys are suffering in school (which should, by all means, be examined and addressed), it hasn’t yet translated to a diminished ability to earn the most money when they do get degrees. In a capitalist culture, that money is power. Compare that to this: Of the 1.5 billion illiterate people in the world, two-thirds are women. UNICEF estimates that approximately 65 million girls are denied access to basic education – more girls than boys. The UN has a number of other startling statistics here that may have you clutching your head.
- The very existence of the word “slut.” Honor killings. Purity balls. The pervasive belief that our sexuality and desires have to be punished or suppressed, that the amount of sex we’ve had – either “too much” or none at all – defines our worth.
- Men are more often victims of crime, although the discrepancy between the sexes has decreased over time (another way to view that is here). However, men are, by far, more likely to be perpetrators of crime. I touched on this in my post, and readers thought I was branding sons criminals before they even leave the womb. Not true. Rather, I posited the question: Why, when a woman doesn’t want a daughter out of fear, is she afraid of raising a potential victim but not a potential victimizer?
- When men are called “girls” or “pussies” to push them to behave in a more “masculine” way, there’s no greater reminder that we’re universally considered the lesser sex.
So, yes, I would say the world is harder for women.
Finally, let me address the one criticism that I felt was most heartfelt and that hurt the most feelings: that women shouldn’t have sex preferences at all. It’s true that I find sex assumptions and preferences problematic, simply for the fact that each child will bring his or her own personality to the table, and expecting them to conform to gender expectations can be limiting or stifling.
However, I’ll end this article on a confession: At one time in the not-so-distant past, I have thought that if I ever had a child, I would want a daughter. Because of my own dysfunctional family dynamic, I thought that I could recreate and improve upon the only model I’ve ever had of a mother-daughter relationship. I would do better. I would love my daughter unconditionally, accept her for who she was, and send her out into the world a strong, capable, intelligent woman. Even before I started the article about women not wanting daughters, but certainly reinforced by it and the comments it received, I have come to realize that any dynamic I hope to create with my child or children can be created regardless of sex. The mother-daughter relationship I want and didn’t get is possible with a son, too; the love and support I desire to give is possible regardless of the 23rd chromosome. Because the common denominator is me.
Thank you for listening, and keep talking.
Couldn’t it be that the reason we have a lot of men CEO is because men are most likely to start businesses and own businesses. When i go to school and i go to my world’s business classi harldy see any girls, but if i go to a media arts or an arts class i would see mostly girls. if i start a business i would not step down from my job as a CEO just because 97% of men are CEOs of big companies. if you do further research into the wage gap you would see why there is one. Consider this wouldn’t it be beneficial to higher many women in high positions if i can pay them less.
i dont think women are judged by how much or how little sex they have had, thats just absurd. They are judged by how sexually appealing they are which i think its wrong but not all guys do that. but here is the thing those guys who go looking for attractive women get played upon because those women are looking for the guy with the fatest wallet. (this doesn’t attribute to all women).
I have one question; do you think women were oppressed? and do you think they are still being oppressed today?
Thank you for the comment, John.
>>Couldn’t it be that the reason we have a lot of men CEO is because men are most likely to start businesses and own businesses.<<
Why do you think this is?
If you don't think women are judged by their sexuality, then you haven't been paying attention to current affairs. Here are just two examples:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/29/rush-limbaugh-sandra-fluke-slut_n_1311640.html
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/16/republican-lawmaker-blames-11-year-old-victim-of-alleged-gang-rape/ (In this one, an 11-year-old who was gang raped is criticized by a politician for how she dressed. Which is irrelevant.)
Do I think women were oppressed? Yes.
Do I think they are still being oppressed today? To a lesser degree depending on where you live. Here in the United States, we get educations, earn paychecks, and can make choices for ourselves and our families. But oppression doesn't need to be overt to exist. It takes a number of forms — many of them I mentioned in my blog post above.
Erin,
I really really enjoyed this follow up blog. I am glad to hear your response to these comments and enjoy that you opened yourself up to give your honest feelings about the whirlwind of a week it was. Keep being so thoughtful…
Thanks, Michelle!
Pingback: One wants to know the sex of the baby | Park Baby
Strange, i think it is the other way around and i think women want to raise boys because it is much easier as they tend to be the ones to take the hit more often in our modern western society (i am from Sweden). In my country women tend to see boys and men as slaves to their (radicalized feminists, blunt women who feeeel everything is against them). If you look at how the slaves were tought to open dorrs, do free work without a paycheck we can see that in modern society today as men buy drinks and help women out witout even a tiny thought of repayment. I think it is necessary to way in to the socialconstructionist agenda that men can be the ones who fall further down the rope. For instance if you look at it from a reproductive vs productive point of view, you can not count out that having to raise more money in order to be able to have a shot at the reproductive area is a matter of power. It can also meen that men are the ones who have to fight harder for every “penny” in this world. Just saying, a countertheory is needed. Ps. sorry for my bad english, it was a while since i used it.ds
Hmm, some mistakes, ergo:
It should be” weigh in” as supposed to “way in” and ..a matter of power…for women.
I think that psychology and conformism has a lot to do with the fact that many young women now feel that they are oppressed. Science and reality disproves it and says that it most certainly are myths. The same thing could have hapened with men and boys if they also were tought to believe they were oppressed. In Sweden a new start has been made and it´s a grassroot-movement that we call equality 2.0-beyond feminism. Most women and men tend to like this movement as supposed tom the more polemic and conspiracy/patriarchy thinkers. I welcome that movement and second it! You are free to join
Hi Mat! Thank for the comment. I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. You think women want to have boys because they know boys will “take the hit” more often — as in, they will be mistreated? I don’t think that paints a very accurate or fair picture of women as a sex. You’re basically saying we’re all sadists.
And I wouldn’t compare “chivalry” (a very outdated, sexist expectation of men’s and women’s behaviors) as equivalent to slavery. Being decent is something both men and women should be.
I appreciate that your comment is very reasoned and thoughtful, though. Thank you for visiting us from Sweden!
Also, when you take in to consideration that when you set percentages for all men that are “on top” you do something called “Apex Fallacy” which means that it is less than a ppm (parts per millon) men that have these positions.
1. Men don´t work for men, they most often work for their family and that means normally a wife is included-
2. The wife probably choose this man just because of his position.
3. If you look down the ladder you will find most men, these men are never heard of in feminstic epistemology.
Apex Fallacy is basically a kind of status blindness: Look up look up look up!
Hi again, Mat. I’m familiar with the apex fallacy. I’m not saying that all men are CEOs and make the money of CEOs; I’m saying that there are simply not enough women’s voices in places that matter (places of power), and that our ability to be heard is affected by it.
I don’t know anyone who chose their husband based on his corporate position. Maybe some women (and men) have, but I’d have to see statistical data to support that conclusion.
Men and women alike work to support their families; it’s this way in most modern societies.
Hm, tough to explain in foreign language but i´ll try in a short story; men who are politicians don´t especially care for male matters but for society as a whole. Since the liberals, the democrats (european standard) and the suffragettes worked together to get women the chance to vote women now have equal opportunities to change society. Just for the lulz i can see that here in Sweden where we have plenty of female politicians, they themselves more often tend to work for issues concerning women and many times at the cost of men ( Apex fallacy, quotation i.e discrimination based on gender) causing a problem for society as a whole, not because of enhancing womens opportunities but to do so at the cost of men. Our social capital is in decline, our laws are rewritten to make accuses of sexual assault now have to put up with reversed burden of proof.
You say you don´t know anyone who chooses thier husbands based on their status. Do we really need proof of that earth are round? ( Sorry, swedish hush retorics) Can you look around your own sphere? You will for instance find many male doctors maried to female nurses but almost never the opposite. And if my personal encounter will count in this debate; i was visiting a friend whom studied philosophy in Chicago 2003, on the streets was the opportunity to pick up free magazines with adds and people looking for different gadgets or even personal contact. I especially remember one add: Want to meet a man, 20-35 years old, must have hot, expensive red car!.
Some statistics to backup my words:
Warren Farrell “The startling truth behind the paygap-why men earn more and what women can do about it”
Roy Baumeister ” Is there anything good about men?”
Men and women like to backup their families and that is perfect but i think marriage is like a company or an orchestra where you don´t need two drummers. Even in our societies where women really can make free choices there is statistics backin up that they (women) tend to choose more likely to oldfashioned chores, they prefer to spend time more often at home etc when they don´t need to work outside the home. I don´t say it is good for society, i am just saying this is what is happening. I also strongly believe that society as a whole would bargain if the paygap wasn´t there, we just need to make sure that we use the right tools when we do it. Not at the expense of men and not at the cost of womens free will. Women shouldn´t have to be falling in between societys demands neither their own free will.
Thanks for letting me post here and once again, sorry for my poor english, i promise to keep up
Hi Mat. Your English is great!
I disagree that male politicians work for society as a whole, whereas female politicians work only for women. It really depends on a lot of factors — the politician’s party affiliation, the politician’s rich friends, and the politician’s pet causes.
Male doctors/nurses: I don’t think this is an indication that women are status seekers. People simply fall in love at work. If you’re talking about more men being doctors than women, then you’d have to look at the history of the profession. When were women allowed to go to college/medical school? What societal influences push men to be doctors and women to be nurses? The point is: to paint all women as status seekers (which can certainly be true for *some* women as well as *some* men) does a disservice to both genders.
Paying women equally wouldn’t hurt men. None of the things feminism advocates for is at the expense of men. Feminism is the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes. That’s it.
I have to go out, Mat, but I just have to thank you for this civil discourse. I knew I liked Sweden.
Thank you!
I like both these posts and agree with you that sex preference is problematic. This was probably covered in the comments at Jezebel (which I haven’t read), but as a mother of three sons, I wonder where you have met these women who don’t want daughters — all I see and hear around me is women who are disappointed that they have sons and who make comments suggesting that I must share their disappointment. I once felt as you did about doing a better job with the mother-daughter relationship than my own mother did, but I love my boys so much that I can’t believe I ever thought I had a preference for a girl. I feel like some of the women who want daughters have a misguided belief that feminism means that women are inherently superior, which is disheartening … like those “boys are stupid – throw rocks at them” shirts. As a mom of boys, the idea that anyone feels that way is really hurtful.
Thanks so much for your comment. These women are friends of mine, but I also know friends-of-friends who have said the same. As you can tell if you read the Jezebel comments, many women said they felt same re: not wanting a daughter. That anyone would treat someone as lesser based on their sex (or anything else, really) is really disheartening. Thank you for visiting.
About boys/girls and giving birth. In China yoú can only give birth to one child and they prefer to have boys (i know it´s a terrible situation) because they need help to provide because they are in such a hardship. Where you win you also loose: Men are more expendable in society but for the small percentages of men who make it big it is certainly a winning concept. There is no laws to get around our evolution and there is no chance that Maslow´s hierarchy of needs can be tumbled at. Sometimes we need to accept the facts that we can´t do it all, on one side we win, on the other we loose.
I think it is fair to say that feministic epistemology fails to take that under consideration when talking about men on top of the world. As you say, we want to exchange ideas and help eachother out ” Survival of the fittest” now i.e meaning “The ones who are more willing to cooperate will win” ..just not in every area but in that area where they have the best interest in!
Like I said in this article, the patriarchy hurts men, too.
Actually the concept of that something invented (sssm=The Standard Social Science Model) either it be Santa Claus, Patriarchy or the spaghetti monster are the reason til why men hurt (as well) makes me feel a little bit sick. It does not hurt me at all but it hurts me that young women now believe in these ideas inherrited by Bernay´s (Inventor of public relations and also heavy user of women through letting suffraggettes smoke cigarettes calling it a manly freedom that women needed as well)
I will give you a link related to this issue where Alan Sokal speaks of the matter:
You can say that it is a clash in America between radical relativists (postmodernists) and creationists (Your christian right). Have no time or space to unfold here
Where the first tend to speak about structures as in “we are all socially constructed” which of course is 100% truth but it says nothing about human phenomenas painted in the big picture. I strongly believe, to use a metaphore, that many feminists believe in this epics but to me it is like when pooring beer in a glass and you get a head. You are speaking about the head but even without the head you still have the beer.
Genderroles are the same, they are not explained by structures as they are not invented out of thin air. Humans make choices that create these structures.
So the talk about patriarchy could be very interesting and it is but in order to have a great story you need countertheories: Thesis-antithesis-synthesis.
In many ways that is what is happening today and that is why graasroot-movements like ours are created so we can have as many theories tried as possible in order to come to a conclusion or in this case; consensus.
Stephen Pinker, the author, explains it well in: “The blank slate”
I will ask you a retorical question:
Do you think that your acchievements in life were or are hindered by your own thoughts or by structural dilemmas in our culture?
Looking forward to an intriguing answer
for now, bye and take good care!
For a man to acchieve this singers status would take approx. 10-20 years, do you think it is fair?
I take it you’ve never heard of Justin Bieber.
Great comment and splendid choice, did you find any cherries whilst wondering where to pick?
I am just saying…sex is an important issue with human beeings. There is no structure, only neo cortex! And i love it although i know women choose me and i am just a similar hunter. Have faith, Europe differs and europeans will make a change for the better for bost sexes, after all you are a carboncopy of our individualistic system “The enlightenment”
Justin Bieber, really!?
How many women do you find in this category? :
Morphine, chill stream, bad dream
Serving as numbers on dogtags, flak-rags, sandbags
Your girl has married your best friend, love’s end, poison pen
Your flesh will always creep, tossing turning sleep
The wounds that burn so deep
Your mother sits on the edge of the world
When the cameras start to roll
Panoramic viewpoints resurrect the killing fold
Your father drains another beer he’s one of the few that cares
Crawling behind a Saracen’s hull
From the safety of his living room chair
Forgotten Sons, forgotten Sons, forgotten Sons
And so I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the Tricolor
I must fear evil for I am but mortal and mortals can only die
Asking questions, pleading answers from the nameless
Faceless watchers that stalk the carpeted corridors of Whitehall
Who order desecration, mutilation, verbal masturbation
In their guarded bureaucratic wombs
Minister, Minister care for your children, order them not
Into damnation to eliminate those who would trespass
Against you, for whose is the kingdom?
The power and the Glory, forever and ever
Amen
Halt who goes there?
death
Approach…. friend
You’re just another coffin on its way down the emerald aisle
Where the children’s stony glances mourn your death
In a terrorist’s smile
The bomber’s arm places fiery gifts on the supermarket shelves
Alleys sing with shrapnel, dance in a temporary hell
Forgotten Sons
From the dole queue to the regiment a profession in a flash
But remember Monday’s signings when from door to door you dash
On the news a nation mourns your unknown soldier count the cost
For a second you’ll be famous but labelled posthumous
Forgotten Sons
Forgotten Sons
Ring o’ roses, they all fall down
Peace on earth and mercy mild, Mother Brown has lost her child
Just another Forgotten Son
Pardon, wrong video.
I absolutely love your blog and find almost all of your post’s to be precisely what I’m looking for. Does one offer guest writers to write content in your case? I wouldn’t mind writing a post or elaborating on a number of the subjects you write regarding here. Again, awesome weblog!
Wow, those men’s rights groups are insane! Men always have had all the rights which they withheld from women until we took a stand. They didn’t like it when women demanded equality, and they’re still fighting to take those earned rights away from us. There is a need for feminism, but not men’s rights groups as men really don’t have anything to whine about since this world obviously favors males. No man has ever been oppressed due to their gender, at least not to the extent women are and have been. No white heterosexual male knows what true oppression really is, especially since they’re the ones doing the oppressing. Funny how men can be so blatant sexist, say all the crap they want about women, but if you say one tiny little thing about their gender which hurts their very sensitive male ego, they bombard you with the nastiest names in the English, (or any other), language. Great article, you have said it exactly how it is. Unlike those idiots that ranted against you, you can back up what you say with facts. All women need to be strong and fight against the chauvinist pieces of garbage that try to keep us from our hopes and dreams just because of the body we were born into. We are not going to tolerate this sexist BS anymore, so all those women hating pigs out there can just get over it.
Thank, Kat. I appreciate your input and support. The thing I find most puzzling about MRAs is that they often blame feminism for constructs they feel are limiting — i.e., military conscription — which are the result of the patriarchy. If they are truly inspired by equality rather than hatred of women, I think they’d find we are on the same side. I read two articles today directly addressing MRAs and some of their complaints, and you’ll probably find them interesting, too:
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2012/06/10/all-hail-the-matriarchy-and-a-note-to-the-dudebros/
http://www.shakesville.com/2012/05/this-is-so-worst-thing-youre-going-to.html
Thanks for reading!
By my reckoning, 10+ million men have been brutally killed in the defense of women in this country. This outweighs, by orders of magnitude, all of the perceived injustices that are listed in the last half of the article.
To right this wrong, there should be an immediate, unconditional draft of all females of appropriate age and ability into the armed forces. The armed forces should consist entirely of females until 10+ million women have sacrificed their lives.
The military draft was devised by men in order to fight wars started by men. Women are not allowed to fight in combat even if they want to and are qualified to. So your beef is not with me or with feminism. It’s with the patriarchy.
Wars are fought to “protect” everybody, not just women. We could go down a rabbit hole discussing the legitimacy of wars and what they’re meant to accomplish; that’s not the point.
But sure — let’s send women to their deaths and call it equality. That makes total sense.