If a young woman in middle school or high school hangs up a poster of Barack Obama in her room, this is seen as acceptable. It’s fine for women to admire men and want to be like them.
If a young man (the same age) hangs up a poster of Hillary Clinton in his room, this is seen as odd (maybe even troubling, is he gay? Oh no!).
Society tells us young men can’t think of women as role models, unless they’re a family member, whereas young women can admire and seek to emulate anyone, regardless of gender.
If you’re a young man, and if you have a poster on your wall with a woman, she had better be half-naked in a bikini, even if the Ronald Reagan or Gen. Patton poster next to it obviously features the man fully-clothed.
Young men are not to taught to think of women as role models. They are taught to think of them as either family members or sexual objects. There is no other category presented.
"http://charlesclymer.blogspot.com/2013/02/why-are-we-so-ashamed-of-our-women.html (via there-was-a-girl)
THIS IS SO TRUE!
(via jahalath)
I think the major problem here is that women were clamoring for “strong female characters,” and male writers misunderstood. They thought the feminists meant [Strong Female] Characters. The feminists meant [Strong Characters], Female.
So the feminists shouldn’t have said “we want more strong female characters.” They should have said “we want more WEAK female characters.” Not “weak” meaning “Damsel in Distress.” “Weak” meaning “flawed.”
Good characters, male or female, have goals, and they have flaws. Any character without flaws will be a cardboard cutout. Perhaps a sexy cardboard cutout, but two-dimensional nonetheless. And no, “Always goes for douchebags instead of the Nice Guy” (the flaw of Megan Fox’s character in Transformers) is not a real flaw. Men think women have that flaw, but most women avoid “Nice Guys” because they just aren’t that nice. So that doesn’t count.
So what flaws can female characters have? Uh, I don’t know. How about the same flaws a male character would have?
"(Source: ungoodpirate, via alexandernevermind)
Language does not just describe the world we live in, it also forms our way of seeing things. Exposing children to idiomatic and stereotyped language about gender roles can contribute to reinforcing gender imbalances we’d rather do away with. For example, the expression ‘boys will be boys,’ which is used to excuse bad behavior on the part of a man, reinforces the idea that men supposedly cannot control their urges, and creates a culture of tolerance towards inappropriate behavior (as long as it’s done by a man).
Unsurprisingly, women-centered idioms and expressions tend to be derogatory, as is the case with ‘run like a girl.’ This is, once again, an expression that is used to remind boys that in order to be real boys, they must at all costs avoid behavior that might be perceived as feminine.
This! And that “nut up or shut up” and the “man up” phrases need to burn in hell. Some guy I work with told me to “man up” and you can believe, after I was finished with him, he’ll never, ever consider saying that again.
I also vehemently hate when people tell little boys that they are now the “man of the house.” I’ve gotten on my mother for telling my older brother this b/c it can allow/force a young boy to suppress feelings about their absent father and/or allow young boys to terrorize other children (especially girls) b/c they believe they hold some sort of authority (both of which happened to my brother and seriously affected our relationship. Just as we code “feminine qualities” as weakness we also imbue ideas of masculinity with power, force, and the ability to terrorize that we consistently ignore even though they’re very damaging to boys and young men when they’re still developing.
(Source: llenademoras, via smokinmokes)
