Tuesday, December 15, 1998
Sometimes
By Victoria Wong
we dredge up
the stereotypesI settled down with last Tuesday's Star-Bulletin and saw two articles written by women. The first of the two articles, though written in jest, states that only one solution exists for happiness: "Wives for everyone!" The second article, of a more serious nature, claimed the Monica Lewinsky-Bill Clinton affair cast an anti-feminist shadow.
Before I continue, let me get this feminist stuff straight. The root of the feminist view is "equal rights for men and women," right? And most people believe this, right? I'd like to believe that the "equality" part in the United States Constitution refers to women as well as men.
So, assuming society supports equal rights for the most part, why is the stereotype of woman as wife and mother still so strong today? And why are women reinforcing the stereotype?
Women have come a long way from "Donna Reed Show" times. Women wear pants, work and support households. Yet, at times it doesn't seem as if society has moved forward at all. Women are competing with men for jobs, but society still mentally retains that image of a "Leave it to Beaver" wife.
The first article suggested that someone who "(gets) the kids up, fed and out the door in the morning," who remembers relatives' birthdays, who must clean up after everyone and write thank-you notes, is known as a "wife."
Yes, indeed, I could use one of those too. It sounds like Rosie, the robot maid from the Jetsons. To the wives who read this: Weren't you insulted to be summed up as a robot maid?
EVEN more of a shock was the second article. The title was "Lewinsky affair casts shadow on women." This bothers me. I am a woman. I do not feel the shadow being cast upon me or the rest of womankind. I would have been insulted enough if a man had written the article, but no, it was a woman of my generation.
The article argued that the affair was "morally wrong." Who determines what is "morally wrong"? Neither Clinton nor Lewinsky directly hurt the American public. They had no intention of even including the public in their dilemma, so it is not up to us to determine the morality of the situation involving two adults.
The article also claimed that the affair "destroyed lives." I can only think of two people whose lives could have been destroyed by the affair: Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. But their lives are not our business either. Lives are "destroyed" daily, but we don't seem to mind unless the destruction is printed in the media.
As an outsider who doesn't care about the lives of strangers, I do not know how their actions were "morally wrong." I do not know who Lewinsky hurt, but I do know she did not darken all women in any way.
For the enlightened who have seen the Spencer Tracy-Katharine Hepburn comedy "Adam's Rib" -- a fabulous movie -- do you remember the scene in which Hepburn, the lawyer, asks the jury to imagine that the genders of the victim and the perpetrator of the crime were reversed? I ask you to do this now. Would anyone accuse a man of sleeping his way to the top? Would a headline accuse him of casting a shadow on all men?
To achieve gender equality, and gain respect between genders, sometimes we must switch roles to see if we are being overly unjust in our accusations due to petty stereotypes. This isn't to say that we must ignore role differences. As Tracy said in the last line of "Adam's Rib": "Vive la difference."
Victoria Wong is 17 and attends Punahou School.
The Goddess Speaks runs every Tuesday
and is a column by and about women, our strengths, weaknesses,
quirks and quandaries. If you have something to say, write it and
send it to: The Goddess Speaks, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, P.O.
Box 3080, Honolulu, 96802, or send e-mail
to features@starbulletin.com.
