Post 4 - The Hypocrisy of Patriarchy

Living in a patriarchy, I must acknowledge that men are granted a good degree of control over their body and how they look (McIntosh 1).  Men generally will not be discriminated against for the way they naturally appear or the clothes they happen to like.  They will not lose a job to another male because he had six packs and was a hunk.  They will be based on merit and skill alone.  Conversely, women are constantly judged for the way they look, it seems to be the only quality that the patriarchy deigns to care for.  A skilled conventionally unattractive woman could easily lose a position to a less skilled, more attractive lady because the interviewer happened to like the way she looked.  When men aren't expected to look attractive, but men are, we end up with Lois marrying Peter, Marge marrying Homer, and Peggy marrying Al.  Through media, these differences in gender roles are recodified, repeated, and reinforced so it becomes the norm.  However, only the fictional characters depicted in the media can inhabit the ideal woman that society expects.  That is because patriarchy often operates along dichotomous lines, but it hypocritically expects members of its societies to inhabit both sides of the binary.  So many things are expected of women that it is nigh impossible to satisfy every person’s requirements.  There are conflicting standards for almost every aspect of the female experience. Yet, it is most explicit within the issue of women’s rights over their bodies, as well as the cascading topics covered by this term.   

In regards to the way that women present themselves, women are always expected to be sexy and uninviting, yet modest.

A propaganda piece trying to convince
women that fighting for agency
forces them to lose their femininity

How is this possible and who determines whether this line is crossed? I usually talk about the "patriarchy" is if it is a bureaucratic organization that lays down all these rules, but it's really just vague social rules we have all internalized.  Therefore, everyone will have a different opinion on what is appropriate or "slutty." If a young girl decides to wear a long dress with sleeves, she may be regarded as puritanical or virginal (Berger 59).  No one will take her seriously because they perceive her as weak, uninviting, or naive.  However, if a woman wants to wear a low-cut tank top with cut-off jeans, she may be seen as vapid, or skanky and will again, not be taken seriously.  The middle ground is impossible to find because men and women will think either thing about almost any style of dress.  An appropriately long skirt to one person may be too revealing for another.  The issue truly appears when these values do not fall in line with those of established authority figures.  These people will be present our entire lives and judge young girls as well as grown women.  A comfortable skirt may be too short for the principal or too long for an employer.  Without clear and established boundaries, the choice and control over what women decide to wear is wrested from them.  They must dress for every potential viewer and every potential scenario, rather than dressing for themselves.

When a women doesn't even have the agency to choose her own clothes, she loses access to the very portrayal of her identity.  Psychologically, when one feels they do not have an identity recognized by the society at large, their perception of restriction can affect other aspects of their life.  This phenomenon manifests itself in areas that require a great degree of motivation such as political or medical processes.  This is especially true with women's' rights over their body like contraception and abortion.  If a woman feels as if she cannot affect the way she looks, how could she muster the strength to fight for abortion rights?  From a very early age, women are socialized to understand they do not have control, so when religious or political leaders state that same "fact" in reference to reproductive rights, women are already prone to believe them.  The message being sent by these barriers and laws is that men (both in the macro political process and the micro relationship level) have the ultimate control over almost every aspect of a female's life.  It is the man's responsibility to keep women from getting pregnant and it is the man's responsibility to choose if he wants to be in the child's life.  The only burden women must carry is the fallout when men abandon them (Gay 269).

Women are restricted from controlling their own
bodies, but still have the responsibility of caring
for their children. The hypocrisy is appalling

 These various levels of control only reinforce the patriarchal values held by mainstream society and subconsciously held by many women.  Thankfully, with more visibility because of the internet, there is major pushback to these ideals.  Some companies are using their ad campaigns to portray natural women, with many companies abandoning Photoshop and utilizing a variety of models (plus size models, those with disabilities, and even skin abnormalities).  Consumers are supporting these campaigns and the companies are making money and spreading influence.  When enough people tell companies that they will no longer support their poor representation, the corporate world will be driven towards progress just based on profit.  Hopefully, when women and society in general take charge of their bodies, how they are represented, and how the media operates, we will be psychologically revitalized and motivated to make further strides towards equality (Lorde 43).

Citations:
Audre Lorde, "The Transformation of Silence into Language and Action"
John Berger, "Ways of Seeing"
Peggy McIntosh, "Unpacking the Invisible Backpack"
Roxanne Gay, "The Alienable Rights of Women"