Steinem and Syfers

In the first piece I read today, If Men Could Menstruate, Gloria Steinem talked about the theory of penis envy. She focused on the concept of menstruation and the reaction to this phenomenon if men were the ones who experienced this phenomenon. Her opinion was that if men were the ones in place of women, they would find a way to embrace menstruation and make it an enviable quality instead of a detestable one. "Menopause would be celebrated as a positive event, the symbol that men had accumulated enough years of cynical wisdom to need no more". Steinem also says that men would find a way to normalize the occurrence, or make it seem cool, and one man might say to another, "Yeah, man, I'm on the rag". The author goes on to talk about how periods make women behave most like men during that one week of the month. She then asks, if this is the case, why are women expected to be more rational and less emotional during the other three weeks? Why is this the norm for males but a surprising turn of character for females?

I then read Why I Want a Wife by Judy Syfers, in which the author described her views on the duties and responsibilities of a wife. Her piece basically listed every chore imaginable, and then a few more. Syfers, a housewife herself, provided an interesting viewpoint, as she was, in essence, reflecting on her own role within the household. One aspect of the piece I found particularly interesting was Syfers' use of the word wife. Wife could almost be substituted out and replaced by RobotModel 6000, and the meaning and message of the piece would still be intact. There was no intimacy with the word wife, no feeling. It was just wife this and wife that, for example when talking about wives from the viewpoint of men, the author says, "If, by chance, I find another person more suitable as a wife than the wife I already have, I want the liberty to replace my present wife with another." In this quote it is obvious that there is no personal element in marriage, and the speaker's reference to other wives is similar to an upgrade from the iPhone 3 to the new iPhone 4. My main issue with the piece is that it makes it seem as though men have unlimited needs and demands. Not all men want to view their wives as objects, and not all men want their wives to "type their papers after the men have written them". Also, not all women in 1971 would accept this kind of cold and lifeless treatment. I think the piece is summed up well when the author says, "My God, who wouldn't want a wife?". This statement perfectly embodies the idea that wives are desirable because of all they can do for a man, what they can give. This implies, however, that wives are easy to obtain. If a man wants a wife, he can have one, he can go out and get one. There is no choice on the female's side, it is just another manly desire that shall be fulfilled. This piece brings up a lot of controversy, but it is a very interesting view on the role of women in the household and the role of the wife through the eyes of her husband.

Faludi

The third piece I read today was Blame It on Feminism by Susan Faludi. This piece talked about what it meant to be a woman in America in the 20th century. The piece also gave a great definition of feminism, which I feel strengthened the argument of the piece and set the stage for a great conclusion. Feminism is often a word that is thrown around a lot, given extreme meanings, and sometimes even has a negative connotation. I liked how clearly Fauldi defined feminism when she stated, "Feminism asks the world to recognize at long last that women aren't decorative ornaments, worthy vessels, members of a "special interest group". They are half (in fact, now more than half) of the national population, and just as deserving of rights and opportunities, just as capable of participating in the world's events, as the other half". I think this quote clearly defines the goal of feminism and the overarching goal of females around the world: equality, nothing more, nothing less. Feminism has a very basic agenda, and I realized that while reading this piece. The piece also touched upon the role of women in popular culture, specifically in the workplace and at home. Women, for the first time in history, are beginning to make a move in the labor force, becoming dominant in certain fields of middle class labor. "Female" professions such as nursing and cuisine are no longer containing females as they are trying to break the mold and advance their careers as well as themselves. Yet the piece asks, "If the status of women has never been higher, why is their emotional state so low?". I thought this was an intriguing question and it made me wonder whether or not women liked their roles in society. Today, we are seeing an increasing amount of women in jobs that require physical labor and these women can often struggle to balance their family lives with the importance and emphasis they are placing on their careers. Can women do both? Can they be respected in a career as well as be a mom and wife? I believe the answer is yes, but only with the help of men. Without the support of men, it is impossible. I also wonder whether or not the man's ego will hold him back. Men are more reluctant to enter into previously deemed "female professions" than females are to enter into the man's domain. I believe if men do not take responsibility and help women in the workplace as well as the household, women will never truly achieve equality.