On Female Mediocrity Friday 11 May 2007 |
I know some girls who think that the only way to troubleshoot their computer problems (hardware or software) is via the millionaire method: Calling A Friend. This friend, invariably, proves to be male. These girls do not think to Google, or to at least find out more information about the specific problem on their own.
I also know of girls who list their hobbies on Facebook on Friendster in the following fashion: "Wakeboarding, Shopping, Chillin', Sleeping, EATING (haha tho I can't do this so much these days, getting fat!), Watching TV (I heart Kwong Sang Woo!!), Tennis and Golf (juz started but quite fun!)".
There is a common thread to all of this. These girls are mediocre, in every sense of the word. I will not say that they are lousy; just mediocre. They expect little from themselves. "Wakeboarding" is a hobby to them because they've done it once over the last 6 months; "tennis" is a hobby to them because they like the feeling of a furry ball going off their racket strings, regardless of trajectory. "Sleeping" and "eating" are more than bodily functions and necessities; they, too, qualify as a hobbies, because these actions are somehow special and unique to these girls. It is interesting that "shitting" and "peeing" do not make these hobby lists. Perhaps "shitting" is less important to these girls than "eating", though the symbiotic relationship between these two actions is difficult to overlook.
Computer problems are the exclusive domain of their tech-savvy male friends; never does it occur to them that perhaps technology isn't as indecipherable as they think it to be. They do not think: If I drive a car, I should learn about its maintenance and upkeep. If I utilize technology on a daily basis, I should familiarize myself with it above and beyond just consuming. They wail instead: "But why? I have my brother / father / uncle / husband / boyfriend to do it for me." And this wail is final, a comprehensive answer to life's vicissitudes.
This is not an exercise in misogyny. Rather, it is a general diatribe against modern society. We - and by this, I mean both men and women - have unconsciously conspired to allow mediocre women to stagnate happily in their mediocrity. I do believe that we are all born mediocre, save for the talented, God-gifted few. All is hard work. Society exerts a positive pressure on men to get good at things, to "deal with it", to yaru (to do with a view to improving). Conversely, however, there is no such expectation on the female in society; the damsel in distress is a stereotype precisely because art imitates life. The woman, the lady, the princess, she is admired for little that she does; she only has to suru (to do, period).
This is not just the fault of the female, though it is arguable that she has let herself down by falling so comfortably into the unchallenging role that society has carved out for her. It is the fault of us all; we prize female beauty to such an extent that all else that she does has no real effect on our judgment of her. It is of course our loss; when an entire gender expects little from its collective self, it is the entire species that suffers.
Caveat time. There will always be indiviual examples of brilliant females. Marie Curie, Helen Keller, Florence Nightingale and Virginia Woolf. But these names do not roll off the tongue as easily as Picasso, Thomas Edison, Shakespeare and Michael Jackson. You will say: "That is because much of history has been written by men. Men do not allow women to get in on the act. It is the men who prevent women from rising above their mediocrity." And to this I will say: you are right. Men were the root of the problem - and women compound it actively (and yet passively) by acquiescing, even now. Both genders have to work together to remove this expectation trap.
A friend pointed out, during our discussion on this topic, that men and women just perform different roles. Men fix the inanimate (arimasu - non-living things), while women nurture the animated (imasu - living things). But increasingly women have to fulfill neither role. Women are fully entitled to have careers now, in modern society; no one will begrudge a woman who chooses not to have kids. Men, on the other hand, have it thrust upon them to communicate well, to get in touch with their feelings, and yet at the same time fix everything that is mildly technological, to be strong, a bulwark, a pillar of support for the entire family unit. It is no surprise that most men fail in this demanding role.
It is not enough to just say that "Oh, girls are no good with the technical stuff", and "We girls are good at some things, you boys are good at others." What are you good at? Really. What is your demonstration of value? My father, not my mother, used to sew my name into my handkerchiefs when I was a boy. I can cook, poorly, but it is edible and it satisfies me. But what are these mediocre girls good at? And would they do what they are good at on a regular basis, without grumbling? And voluntarily? If I ask a girl to cook for me, will she? If I fix her computer for her, will she bring me a nice steaming bowl of lasagna to me? Or will I simply be laughed away at just having that expectation?
The female has settled so comfortably into her role in society that it appears that she has all but disappeared between the cushions. If I put down "wakeboarding" as one of my hobbies, or "bowling" (I suck at it), my male friends will laugh me to hell and back, and afterward the label of "poseur" would naturally affix. There is no corollary for the female. The truth is, many girls have no hobbies. They do not pursue a sport, they do not have something that drives them daily apart from their office obligations. It is the way girls are socialized from a young age. They are taught to be mindful of institutions, to be prim and proper, to colour within the lines. Who can blame them for not investigating the world outside of the bounds prescribed by society? Life is "Office", "School" (even ECAs are stipulated by authorities and institutionalized) and "Home"; "Career", "Exams" and "Family". It is a stark trichotomy. Where is there room for rock-climbing, for armchair philosophy, for electric guitar, for astronomy? Sure, girls are happy to dabble - salsa classes, yoga classes, maybe an odd hobby course here and there; but generally there is no follow through. There is no real interest either; it is a lifestyle choice, because to be able to dance is good for social life; to be slim is good for appearances; to have experienced life as much as possible is "living" according to the advertised ideal, however superficial the experience. There is little true passion, save in a few exceptional cases.
All my male friends have one passion or another: tennis, squash, football, frisbee, chess, magic, pedantry, writing, model kits etc. You name it, and there will be a male out there doing it. Girls will say at this point: "We are passionate about fashion and make-up!" I would laugh at this, except that the statement is too, too true. Once again the superficial is prioritized - not just by these girls, but by society at large. We would rather LOOK at these girls than DO with them (that came out wrong, didn't it).
As for the mediocre female - she has done her sums and acted rationally. I do not kid myself to think that men pursue their passions with not a seed of status-augmentation in their minds. That will always be there. So, accordingly, what is in it for the female to put in effort, to be passionate about anything? What is in it for her to demonstrate a capacity for intelligent conversation, to hold interesting opinions, to engage in any unique activity? If she's already pretty she's got it made; if she's ugly, nothing she can do will help her (save plastic surgery, but I will leave that discourse to other bloggers). So, she plows on in her mediocrity.
If you are one of those girls who has a hobby, who lives for something that you can call your own, if you are one of those girls who does for yourself or at least tries in earnest to, then you are not mediocre. I did not write this with you in mind. Go out and do what you love to do; that will be spreading the word enough.
By Sze Yao Tan
CUMSA Graduate
Editor's Note:
This article by Sze has made it to the Top 20 of a blogging competition and if you enjoyed it you should definitely support him by voting for the entry here (his contestant code is B19) - not only does it help him but you also have a shot at several prizes...
If you didn't enjoy it, bitch about it on the tagboard - or even better - write me a response. =)
I also know of girls who list their hobbies on Facebook on Friendster in the following fashion: "Wakeboarding, Shopping, Chillin', Sleeping, EATING (haha tho I can't do this so much these days, getting fat!), Watching TV (I heart Kwong Sang Woo!!), Tennis and Golf (juz started but quite fun!)".
There is a common thread to all of this. These girls are mediocre, in every sense of the word. I will not say that they are lousy; just mediocre. They expect little from themselves. "Wakeboarding" is a hobby to them because they've done it once over the last 6 months; "tennis" is a hobby to them because they like the feeling of a furry ball going off their racket strings, regardless of trajectory. "Sleeping" and "eating" are more than bodily functions and necessities; they, too, qualify as a hobbies, because these actions are somehow special and unique to these girls. It is interesting that "shitting" and "peeing" do not make these hobby lists. Perhaps "shitting" is less important to these girls than "eating", though the symbiotic relationship between these two actions is difficult to overlook.
Computer problems are the exclusive domain of their tech-savvy male friends; never does it occur to them that perhaps technology isn't as indecipherable as they think it to be. They do not think: If I drive a car, I should learn about its maintenance and upkeep. If I utilize technology on a daily basis, I should familiarize myself with it above and beyond just consuming. They wail instead: "But why? I have my brother / father / uncle / husband / boyfriend to do it for me." And this wail is final, a comprehensive answer to life's vicissitudes.
This is not an exercise in misogyny. Rather, it is a general diatribe against modern society. We - and by this, I mean both men and women - have unconsciously conspired to allow mediocre women to stagnate happily in their mediocrity. I do believe that we are all born mediocre, save for the talented, God-gifted few. All is hard work. Society exerts a positive pressure on men to get good at things, to "deal with it", to yaru (to do with a view to improving). Conversely, however, there is no such expectation on the female in society; the damsel in distress is a stereotype precisely because art imitates life. The woman, the lady, the princess, she is admired for little that she does; she only has to suru (to do, period).
This is not just the fault of the female, though it is arguable that she has let herself down by falling so comfortably into the unchallenging role that society has carved out for her. It is the fault of us all; we prize female beauty to such an extent that all else that she does has no real effect on our judgment of her. It is of course our loss; when an entire gender expects little from its collective self, it is the entire species that suffers.
Caveat time. There will always be indiviual examples of brilliant females. Marie Curie, Helen Keller, Florence Nightingale and Virginia Woolf. But these names do not roll off the tongue as easily as Picasso, Thomas Edison, Shakespeare and Michael Jackson. You will say: "That is because much of history has been written by men. Men do not allow women to get in on the act. It is the men who prevent women from rising above their mediocrity." And to this I will say: you are right. Men were the root of the problem - and women compound it actively (and yet passively) by acquiescing, even now. Both genders have to work together to remove this expectation trap.
A friend pointed out, during our discussion on this topic, that men and women just perform different roles. Men fix the inanimate (arimasu - non-living things), while women nurture the animated (imasu - living things). But increasingly women have to fulfill neither role. Women are fully entitled to have careers now, in modern society; no one will begrudge a woman who chooses not to have kids. Men, on the other hand, have it thrust upon them to communicate well, to get in touch with their feelings, and yet at the same time fix everything that is mildly technological, to be strong, a bulwark, a pillar of support for the entire family unit. It is no surprise that most men fail in this demanding role.
It is not enough to just say that "Oh, girls are no good with the technical stuff", and "We girls are good at some things, you boys are good at others." What are you good at? Really. What is your demonstration of value? My father, not my mother, used to sew my name into my handkerchiefs when I was a boy. I can cook, poorly, but it is edible and it satisfies me. But what are these mediocre girls good at? And would they do what they are good at on a regular basis, without grumbling? And voluntarily? If I ask a girl to cook for me, will she? If I fix her computer for her, will she bring me a nice steaming bowl of lasagna to me? Or will I simply be laughed away at just having that expectation?
The female has settled so comfortably into her role in society that it appears that she has all but disappeared between the cushions. If I put down "wakeboarding" as one of my hobbies, or "bowling" (I suck at it), my male friends will laugh me to hell and back, and afterward the label of "poseur" would naturally affix. There is no corollary for the female. The truth is, many girls have no hobbies. They do not pursue a sport, they do not have something that drives them daily apart from their office obligations. It is the way girls are socialized from a young age. They are taught to be mindful of institutions, to be prim and proper, to colour within the lines. Who can blame them for not investigating the world outside of the bounds prescribed by society? Life is "Office", "School" (even ECAs are stipulated by authorities and institutionalized) and "Home"; "Career", "Exams" and "Family". It is a stark trichotomy. Where is there room for rock-climbing, for armchair philosophy, for electric guitar, for astronomy? Sure, girls are happy to dabble - salsa classes, yoga classes, maybe an odd hobby course here and there; but generally there is no follow through. There is no real interest either; it is a lifestyle choice, because to be able to dance is good for social life; to be slim is good for appearances; to have experienced life as much as possible is "living" according to the advertised ideal, however superficial the experience. There is little true passion, save in a few exceptional cases.
All my male friends have one passion or another: tennis, squash, football, frisbee, chess, magic, pedantry, writing, model kits etc. You name it, and there will be a male out there doing it. Girls will say at this point: "We are passionate about fashion and make-up!" I would laugh at this, except that the statement is too, too true. Once again the superficial is prioritized - not just by these girls, but by society at large. We would rather LOOK at these girls than DO with them (that came out wrong, didn't it).
As for the mediocre female - she has done her sums and acted rationally. I do not kid myself to think that men pursue their passions with not a seed of status-augmentation in their minds. That will always be there. So, accordingly, what is in it for the female to put in effort, to be passionate about anything? What is in it for her to demonstrate a capacity for intelligent conversation, to hold interesting opinions, to engage in any unique activity? If she's already pretty she's got it made; if she's ugly, nothing she can do will help her (save plastic surgery, but I will leave that discourse to other bloggers). So, she plows on in her mediocrity.
If you are one of those girls who has a hobby, who lives for something that you can call your own, if you are one of those girls who does for yourself or at least tries in earnest to, then you are not mediocre. I did not write this with you in mind. Go out and do what you love to do; that will be spreading the word enough.
By Sze Yao Tan
CUMSA Graduate
Editor's Note:
This article by Sze has made it to the Top 20 of a blogging competition and if you enjoyed it you should definitely support him by voting for the entry here (his contestant code is B19) - not only does it help him but you also have a shot at several prizes...
If you didn't enjoy it, bitch about it on the tagboard - or even better - write me a response. =)
For those who came down last Saturday, it was a glorious day and the only thing that beat the great weather was the amazing spread of food - I’m not sure exactly how many cups of ice-milo I drank or how many pork floss sandwiches I ate but I know I couldn’t get enough of it and still can’t.
It was great seeing everyone just sitting, chatting and chilling in the sun - some even attempting to get their kites up, no innuendos intended - and what better way to ‘celebrate’ being Malaysian/Singaporean than having an eating competition?
If all the talk about food makes us sound like a lazy bunch of people who are only out to eat at a picnic (guilty as charged), I must say that we’re quite a sporty bunch. The calories consumed from Milo were burnt off by an intensive game of Frisbee, with all that running and falling down. Then again I suppose that depends on how much you drank, and moreover whoever told you that Frisbee is a relaxing and chilled-out sport is lying. It is fun, but extremely cut-throat. Kinda like rugby; it is bloody. Xianjie is the man to ask for information on the sport.
