It would be so much easier to be a dude. Let me explain.
It’s difficult not to judge people based on stereotypes, but, as I see it, there are two kinds of people: Those who are thoughtful, wise and nurturing, and those who spit, have tennis shoes the size of boats and frequently fondle their downtown bonanza.
I’m not one to generalize, but if you fall into the first category, it is likely that you are a female. There’s a ton wrong with this, or so you are led to believe. For instance, if there’s dust in your eye, your tears are believed to be overly emotional. And it means that you are likely “on your time”-which means that sharks are attracted to you, so you should probably stay out of the ocean, especially in icy February.
The gender divide is perplexing, and so I consulted the only kind of man I can talk to (sorry, boyfriend): a gay man.
“It’s easier to be a guy,” said Adam Tamburin, ladies’ man, man’s man, man-about-town. “Because you don’t have a period and you don’t have ovaries that hurt you and make you mean.” He paused thoughtfully. “And also, guys are more attractive, funnier and more enjoyable to be around.”
Well, hold on there, little doggy. That’s pushing it, isn’t it? I know plenty of attractive women, and there are dozens of funny comediennes, like . um . and . well. Someday.
“In our society, it is probably best for your professional life, unfortunately, to be a white male,” said Tamburin.
Any working woman would agree. (And by “working woman,” I mean a woman who supports herself with a respectable career, not a woman who wears fishnets and drives fast cars with Richard Gere.)
In my leadership position, my views and opinions have been diminished and even laughed at by men. Never has a hyphenated job title been so undervalued. I am a strong, capable, intelligent woman, loosely modeled after Mary Richards (single woman, living on her own, with a successful profession and beret). But apparently, to some, my long hair and eyelashes stipulate that I am incompetent and lacking in the brains department.
While women can easily produce an example of degradation, they can just as easily supply an instance in which they used their sexuality to get what they wanted: crying to police officers, batting heavily mascaraed lashes after missing a class . But shouldn’t we be embarrassed by this manipulation of an already sexist system, or is this simply the only way to get what we want?
If you’re a woman (see description at top if you’re confused), you know that this is often the easiest route. When we show our strength and confidence, we are called bitches behind our backs, often by fellow women. Sen. Hillary Clinton has been called cold and frigid because she rarely shows the emotion expected of her, but, if she did, she would be deemed too emotional to run a country. What is it about a woman as a skilled leader that either angers or makes people uneasy?
Biologically, men are the givers/providers and women, the recipients. It is more acceptable for women to be sexual, but for men to be sexually active; men are allowed and even expected to put their sexuality into practice. Consider the vocabulary: “Pimps” and “playboys” are devoid of the negative connotations of “hooker” and “slut.”
Our evolutionary background has yet to catch up to contemporary times: Women no longer need a man to stand by them. We can adopt, run corporations and show our ankles in the town square. Men may want to educate the objects of their desire, but the chances are good that she already knows what you plan to expose.
Damn, it feels good to be a woman.
Katie Lewis is a senior in the College of Arts and Sciences.
