Musings From the Scary God-Mother

In picking up where I left off with my last post, I feel like there are some things I should clarify regarding my views on gender roles, feminism, and the like.  See, where I think feminists go wrong is in thinking that the double standards only go one way; true women still tend to get awkward glances, rude comments, and we endure discrimination and imbalanced standards but so do men. Of course, there is also the argument that many women realize that sex sells (because it does) and they have opted to use their sexual power for personal gain, oftentimes at the expense of others (i.e., gold diggers). Still, there is very clearly defined image of what makes a man a "man."  Something about testosterone and machismo has men, time and time again, defending their glory in some of the most trivial of confrontations. In my own life, it has made for hours of lasting entertainment at barbecues, parties, gatherings and the like. Many of my guy friends still hold to the belief that a man should be able to provide for his wife even if she elects to work full time and earn her own living.  I think this is great, but I don't think that, if we are going to go on blast with demands for equality, women should expect to be rewarded or even accommodated simply for being women.  

This topic has been on my mind a lot lately as I have been hanging out with my god-sons, aged 7 and 10.  At 7 years old my youngest god-son is convinced that I am his girlfriend, and any time we go on an "adventure" he considers it a date.  "You realize you're going to be the pinnacle of what he looks for in women when he gets older, right?" his mom points out as we are driving to the nickel arcade a few weeks ago.  I can already see it unfolding as ten years into the future he rolls up to dinner with a tattooed, nerdy, somewhat socially awkward, analytical, outspoken, motorcycle-riding hooligan chick by his side. I won't lie, there is a little part of me that is proud of the fact that I can set an example that represents the counter-culture chicks, not only for selfish reasons but also because the more he is used to seeing women outside of the normative lifestyles, the less likely he will be to buy into the mainstream ideals not only of what women should be, but who he should be and what he should aim for as a man.

But while we are on the subject, if we are going to use the term "man" in terms of character qualifications then we should probably hold the same standard for "woman." To me, all if it is universally applicable.  I don't care how pumped up, pressed on, and airbrushed a chick is, if she can't carry herself with integrity, self-respect, and regard others with honesty, dignity and value then she isn't a "woman" in the same way that a coward wouldn't be considered much of a "man."  I think our society has found itself a bit off-course in defining the merits of people by the shallow standards that we have; all of which seem to center around the idea of "what can this person do for me?"  If I can indirectly aid in presenting and fostering the idea of self-determination in my god-sons then they will be less likely to find themselves in unhealthy relationships, instead looking at more meaningful qualities that make a person a good person.  These are my hopes for both of my little minions. 

Of course, there are also the other key important life lessons that we have been working on, such as the importance of gear, how to correctly bang your head and throw the horns to Ozzy songs, the craft of air guitar, and when to appropriately deliver the phrase: "ain't nobody got time fo-dat!" - among many others.  I have already cleared space in my day-planner for a visit to the principal's office to explain why junior responded to his homework assignment by saying: "Ain't nobody got time fo-dat!" Although, I can't be held accountable for "You ain't right!"  He picked that one up somewhere else. :)