Friday 27 January 2017

A Better Vision of Womanhood

Call me sheltered, but I had no idea what the pink hats at the American "Women's March" meant until I read Kathy Shaidles' mocking piece in Taki's Magazine. (Trigger warning: if you're even the slightest nudge to the left, you will hate Taki Mag, and the combox is a sewer.)

How can women be so upset by the crudity of the American President's 2005 locker-room comments and then celebrate it?  

I have looked up the context of Trump's remark, and it wasn't a confession: it was a conversation about how [some] women relate to male celebrities.

What struck me is that in his gossipy anecdote, Trump repeated that the woman under discussion was married, and yet she let him take her furniture shopping. He admitted that he did not get as far as he wanted with her, but continued on to marvel at how far [some] women will let a man go. "And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Whatever you want. You can grab them..." We know the rest. We don't know that he ever actually did that, or if he did it to anyone who didn't think it a fair exchange for a suite of furniture or whatever.

For those of you who have seen Sex & the City, I am reminded of the otherwise level-headed Charlotte's bizarre behaviour when she meets a movie star.  And I have not been entirely immune to the glamour of FAMOUS PEOPLE. In my youth I worked in a sandwich shop and when a famous Canadian comedian walked in, my hands shook as I made his sandwich. For some completely irrational reason, I was overwhelmed by the presence of Bruce McCulloch. (Nota bene: All Bruce wanted was a sandwich, and if he had as much as asked for my phone number I would have thrown up from nerves.) On the other hand, after another Canadian celebrity saw my smile and nod (I vaguely and wrongly recalled meeting him somewhere) and he gave me a saucy wink and a megawatt smile in return, I saw his face on a poster, realized who he was and felt vaguely annoyed.

But quite apart from star-befuddlement, there are women who put themselves up for sale to celebrities and merely rich men, and that's just the way it is. It is fashionable to judge these women, or pretend they don't exist, but for all I know it is as natural to female humans who don't believe in chastity as it is to female penguins to cheat on their mates for the price of a few stones. I am not sure which is worse, allowing a man to maul you because you lust after him or allowing a man to maul you because he has bought you a living-room suite. The two justifications aren't mutually exclusive, of course.

Was it in high-school that I bumped into an acquaintance whose adult boyfriend had sent her to the mall with his credit card and permission to spend? I was shocked, mortified and worried for this teenage girl, but she seemed perfectly sanguine about it.  What is the difference between a "relationship" and what Georgette Heyer calls "elegant prostitution"? Frankly, I think it's whether or not the chap is willing to introduce the girl to his mother, just like in the bad old days.

But my subject is not Trump--whose can-ya-believe-it wonderment about what women will allow celebrities makes him sound like a bumpkin or an overgrown teenage boy--but a vision of womanhood which does not include crude shouting about reproductive organs or wearing symbols of them as hats.

There are two documents to guide us in fashioning--or being true to--an authentic, life-affirming femininity: Mulieris Dignitatem by Saint John Paul II and Woman by Saint Edith Stein.  The latter greatly inspired the former, and her respect for femininity is incredibly liberating in that we have been taught to be ashamed of what comes naturally to so many women: a preference to serve, to put oneself second, to support men rather than to lead them. Oh, how shocking, but oh, how true for so many women.

It can be difficult to be true to Saint Edith's teachings. Mea culpa. When a girl tells me she wants to be a nurse, I say "Why not a doctor?" as if being a nurse were second-rate instead of an entirely different profession with its own dignity. (To be honest, though, I wouldn't do this in the USA, where nurses are paid much better than they are in Canada or the United Kingdom.) I really shouldn't do that (and I should have such a useful profession).

On the other hand, it is not so difficult to question man-bashing on Facebook. A woman I know who has been very unhappy in her relationships with men posted a page taken from a 1950s home economics textbook on how a wife should treat her husband when he comes home from work. She held this up for mockery, as the provider of this page clearly expected her to do.

But all the suggestions were quite nice and even insightful. They included such things as a quick final tidy of the house, making sure the children are presentable, taking a bit of care with one's own appearance, offering the chap a drink of something when he gets home, asking him how is day was instead of complaining about your own, and suggesting he take a seat or have a lie-down. Okay, taking off his shoes was a bit much, I admit. But those other things seemed to me possible and kindly. The obvious intent behind them was to make the working-outside-the-home spouse look forward to going home and feeling grateful to his wife for making it so hospitable. After all, we do all those things for guests. 

I wrote something like that on Facebook, and my poor acquaintance argued along the lines of how difficult all those things were and why should the woman have to and her day is hard, too, etc. And indeed I do know young mothers with small children who literally do not have five minutes of freedom to tidy their hair, never mind their sitting-room. I am not sure why they don't stuff all the children in a playpen or lock them in a padded room for the critical hour. Perhaps they are too kindhearted or too tired to think of it.

I also seem to recall that my father came home to a tidy house, dinner in the oven and small children yelling "Daddy's home!" Of course, my mother always did her best to give us the impression that she thought our father was a semi-divine being. Going to great lengths to make the house and children nice for a man you utterly despise must be extremely difficult.

Well,  I do not have children, so I really cannot judge how difficult it is to control their destructive ways and keep their clothes on for their fathers' evening appearances. However, I am married, so I have a pretty good grasp of male psychology, and treating your husband with daily loving-kindness, made manifest partly by providing a pleasant place to sit, the offer of a cuppa, and a listening ear is a really good idea. I am proficient at the listening ear stuff, but I could improve on the housework and the offer of a cuppa, so I will work on that.

Another thing I recommend is to ponder one's own good luck in having such a good husband. I hope all my married readers have good husbands. No doubt it is hard to ponder the excellence of a husband when yours doesn't have any. (But if he doesn't, why on earth did you marry him?)  I had a birthday recently, and so I had ample opportunity to appreciate B.A.   He bought me a mug and a bracelet, took me out for lunch and then fell in with my suggestion we go to a very girly bar for a cocktail. Naturally I told him how extremely splendid he is and how lucky I am. Even the best husband needs to hear that. And, frankly, I think that is more important than that last-minute tidy.

It's important to children, too. Until my dying day, I will remember my mother saying things like "Oh, children, what a clever and kindly father you have!" Years of propaganda convinced me that I am descended from greatness.

Nota Bene: Of course, B.A. did not come by this woman-like respect for birthdays naturally. Men are not women, so it is really important to tell them early on what feasts and festivals are of crucial importance to us. It is also important to be honest about which presents you love and which presents are kind of....although you probably should delay your reaction to the disappointing present until much later, e.g. when he asks you what you want for Christmas. Then you can say, "I most definitely do NOT want a clock shaped like a dog."


20 comments:

  1. Did BA once give you a clock shaped like a dog? I can imagine some situations in which such a present might be desirable and/or appropriate, but as a random gift choice it seems a little odd.

    My own husband - without any specific instruction from me, btw - seems to have absorbed from somewhere the idea that the proper gift to a woman for special occasions (birthdays, Christmas) is jewellery. I give thanks for this every holiday.


    Clio

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He did. It was to make up for the fact we can't have a real dog in the Historical House...

      Lucky you to get all that jewellery! :-D

      Delete
    2. Well, in your case it does seem that the clock-dog was sort of appropriate, and the present was, in its way, charming. But perhaps not if it was your only present?....

      Clio

      Delete
    3. The dog clock strikes me as endearing given the context. Certainly something my fiance would do! 馃槉

      Delete
    4. I cannot remember my feelings at the time, but I definitely did not think a dog clock was a good substitute for a dog. However, that was all in the past, and I only brought it up so that young wives don't think everyone else's husband was born knowing what the exact right gift is!

      Delete
  2. And those hats weren't even the worst things to be worn on the march. :( How do they not see the absurdity of marching in protest of Trump while dressed as female genitalia? I'm totally baffled by what they were hoping to accomplish, lol!

    And yes!! I wonder where this modern attitude of *I'm too busy/tired/whatever to be bothered to dress nicely in public/tidy before guests come over or my husband comes home, etc.* is coming from? Are people really just too overwhelmed by life? And if so, why? Or have we just lost the sense of the desirability of creating a comfortable and attractive home life for our husbands/families (and adding a bit of beauty to the word when we go out in public)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really don't know. It could be the pink-collar office culture, though. (Shudder! My worst peace-time nightmare is that I'm forced back to that.) I think a lot of women are really, really, REALLY unhappy in their work. After all, only some of us have careers. The rest of us have jobs. If we are lucky, our jobs are fun. If we are not, they are hell. Right now, I am lucky.

      Delete
    2. I saw truly horrifying costume mocking the Virgin Mary. Don't look it up.

      The whole anti-Trump protest thing was just a huge hissy fit.

      Julia

      Delete
    3. Saw it. It didn't even surprise me all that much because of all the parades of recent years. And the pro-abs were insulting Our Lady back in the 80s, too. Blasphemy was quite a thing with them.

      Delete
  3. Every night when my grandfather came home from work, my grandmother greeted him with a cocktail in hand, and they went to the sitting room and shut the door for half an hour, and the children knew that they had better be bleeding profusely from a major artery if they disturbed their parents. They had a very happy marriage until my grandfather died just before their 50th anniversary.

    I can definitely see that the wife, even and maybe especially the stay-at-home-mom, needs to take a load off too. I love that BOTH my grandparents got a few minutes' breather as they transitioned from a busy day into family time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, that is really nice. That was a wonderful emphasis on the MARRIAGE as opposed to the family, which only follows from the marriage, and thrives so much when the marriage is happy.

      Delete
    2. Yes...my grandfather grew up in an unhappy family, and so he made sure his wife was happy, and taught his children (by word and example) how to marry well and build happy marriages.

      Delete
  4. Meanwhile, thanks for your spot-on observations about the march. There are some really mystifying things going on over here these days.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi there!
    I'm sure I'm not the first or most interesting person to do this, but I'm just going to throw out there that I've been a reader (sporadically) since your "seraphic" days and I'll be in Edinburgh in February........ (shy pause) Would love to get coffee!!

    Sara

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll be in Canada for the first half, but if you're around after the 16th, definitely drop me a line! seraphicsingles@yahoo.com

      Delete
  6. While there were hats, costumes, signs, etc. made to look like that, really the original pattern (and the most numerous hats worn) were made to look like kitty cat ears. They had a foul name, but not a foul appearance.

    Rachel

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, before I twigged as to what they were, I thought they were about cats and the pink was just because it's a colour associated with girls. Really, I wasn't thinking very clearly about these hats at all! :-)

      Delete
  7. I'm mostly off blogs for now (reading Kristin Lavransdatter, Pieper, etc instead!) but I came by to see if you had thoughts about Endeavour....

    Anyway, yes, I only have two small children so far but I think that trying to tidy up a bit before your husband come home is a grand idea, as is asking him about his day first. Since our children are still quite young and go to bed early, it is a natural break in the day, anyway- tidy up, play with daddy, have dinner, read a little, and go to bed. (And we have plenty of time to talk etc after the older one is in bed at 7:30.)

    I think a lot of the resistance is actually in the idea that we are "too good" to do menial work, like clean house! That we have more important things to do, like run our children around to fifty million activities and "raise them," as if we can raise them without order in the home!

    ReplyDelete