One of the guys I dated way back when came from an ethnic group with more traditional gender role divisions than mainstream Australian society. He wasn’t notably sexist, although he had characteristics one associates with the nicer conservatives – opening car doors, not swearing in front of women, not butting in when someone else was speaking, generally ‘looking out’ for the weak. I got to know his family – and his younger sister – pretty well over the years. I also remember vividly some conversations we had when she was preparing for her Debutants’ Ball, and later when she entered a beauty contest.
Of course, I was dismissive (as I always have been of anything that smells even faintly of bullshit), arguing that both things were a load of sexist claptrap. Vanya (that was one of the Boy’s nicknames) defended both institutions stoutly, and in light of the ongoing fooferaw over Sarah Palin (including her unparalled gift for clever snark that somehow doesn’t make her look like a bitch), one of his arguments has come back to haunt me. It goes like this:
‘The things that girls learn to do well for their Debut and for beauty pageants don’t just include swanning around a ballroom or wearing a swimsuit with elan. They include being at ease in social company, evidencing fundraising and organisational skills, being able to make friends across class, race and gender lines, being able to schmooze in such a way that it doesn’t seem like schmoozing. In a world where women are winning the right to compete with men in lots of areas, don’t you think those skills may come in handy?’
And you know what, he’s right (Vanya, if you’re reading this, I dips my lid). Sarah Palin won Alaska’s Miss Congeniality. For those unaware of how these things operate, Miss Congeniality is selected by all the other entrants, not by the judges. The award of Miss Congeniality goes to the woman who ‘reflects the respect and admiration of the delegate’s peers, who voted for her as the most congenial, charismatic and inspirational participant’ (Miss USA definition).
Those ‘hostess with the mostess’ skills have a long and distinguished history not just in beauty pageants, but in terms of feminist achievement – or have we (men and women alike) forgotten the extraordinary organising skills of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union? Or the abolitionists? Or the suffragettes generally? How else do you think we went from a society where a woman couldn’t keep any of her property on marriage to one where women had full civil and political rights – all in less than 100 years? Those women amassed enormous monetary war-chests and had extraordinary influence. On meeting Harriet Beecher Stowe, Abraham Lincoln quipped, ‘so you’re the woman who started this great big war’.
Sure, some of their ideas were downright bad (prohibition, for example), but you’ve got to respect the organisational skill that brought them to fruition. And with conventionally ‘masculine’ avenues of political agitating largely closed to them, women fell back on the skills that Sarah Palin has in spades. Being good organisers. Schmoozing (these days we’d call it networking). Hosting the mother of all fundraisers. I’m not saying guys are incapable of this stuff, but I do think it’s fair to say that lots of women can carry it off without looking like slimy arseholes because they’ve simply had the best training.
And, as the traditional, boilerplate (read ‘aggro’ or ‘humourless’) male polly becomes less and less popular with the electorate, expect women with Miss Congeniality’s skills to start making some serious running. Barack Obama’s response to her speech – apart from being serious evidence that he has a political tin ear – also plays right into Sarah Palin’s hands:
He said he assumes Palin “wants to be treated the same way guys want to be treated, which means their records are under scrutiny. I’ve been through this for 19 months. She’s been through it, what four days?” Obama’s hackles were clearly raised by Palin’s dismissal of his community organizing – a response to his earlier dismissal of her record as a small-town mayor.
‘Girly stuff’ political skills are damn useful things to have, and Sarah Palin has them by the bucketload.
37 Comments
Never been very good at those girly skills myself. Indeed, some people said the Sandra Bullock “Miss Congeniality” character reminded them of me. Let’s just say that my wedding dress did not have a train or anything like that because I was afraid that I might trip over it or get tangled in it.
My sister tried to teach me some girl skills, but to no avail. It’s something that comes to her naturally. Her wedding dress had a long train, and she didn’t trip once. Indeed, she managed to do a very complicated dance with train in hand and very high heels!
I wasn’t too flash at them either, LE – and it probably doesn’t matter that much these days. That said, someone who does have them is going to do well in politics, end of story. I just think it’s worth admitting that some of the very traditional ‘girl skills’ (floating around for a good 200 years at least) are going to stand some women in very good stead politically, even in the 21st century.
My first badge as a girl guide was for ‘hostessing’. *blush* I might have looked like a boy, sounded like a boy and behaved like a boy but my grandmother made damn sure I could set a dinner table for a six course meal for eight people by the time I was twelve…
SL, it’s true. Like you, I was always dismissive of such skills – but these days I can see they definitely have their uses. I’ve always wished to be better at small talk, for example.
DEM, my one and only badge over four years of being a guide was my collector’s badge, for my chronologically arranged collection of fossils (complete with little cards identifying species). If there had been nerd scouts, I would have gotten every badge.
Well Sandra Bullock won Miss Congeniality and she’s a top bird, as my father would say!
So this is the argument (shorn of the historical example and applied to SP):
“the skills that Sarah Palin has in spades. Being good organisers. Schmoozing (these days we’d call it networking). Hosting the mother of all fundraisers. I’m not saying guys are incapable of this stuff, but I do think it’s fair to say that lots of women can carry it off without looking like slimy arseholes because they’ve simply had the best training.”
Honestly, I think that is absolute rubbish (litmus test: “slimy arseholes”) and you are only saying it because you are on her side.
I’d love to see Penny Wong become Prime Minister- an asian, a women and a lesbian who also happens to be smart and capable. It would be the political equivalent of the triple twist turn and pike off the five metre diving platform.
But I think she’d need to bone up on congeniality to have any chance …
Mel
And then if, like Palin, she could get an Eskimo – or any “indigenous” type – to play Mr. Mum at home, the wymyn could once again hold their heads high.
Marcellous, actually there is a feminist psychological theory which says that women are better at networking and the like (I’m thinking of Carol Gilligan and her book In A Different Voice). It also says women have a stronger “ethic of care”.
Personally, I have never stood that much store by it because I went to two all girl schools for my high school, and there wasn’t much of an ethic of care, just an ethic of bitchiness. I don’t think one can say that women are more caring than men.
But I do think one can say (as a gross generalisation, of course) that women are often better at social networking. Even though I’m no Miss Congeniality, I can always remember the names of my husband’s work colleague’s children, what their partners do etc. He can’t do the same for either his or my own colleagues, and so we have to do a little “rundown” of who is who before we go out.
The thing is that social networking is not a good or a bad thing in itself. One can use it for good or for ill. Of course, whether one thinks Palin is using her skill for good or for ill all depends on what side of politics one is on. 🙂
Personally I’m a hopeless schmoozer – I just can’t do it. I find I am most comfortable if I am just myself and don’t try to network or schmooze at all. People can take me or leave me. That’s why I’m certainly not a politician!
‘Female’ skills are becoming more evident in various industries. Male producers and production managers are comparatively rare these days. Most of my clients are PR people and women.
Palin does appear impressive which is good because McCain isn’t really. I’m afraid I just can’t get past the theocratic stuff. Sorry.
I don’t think libertarians take it seriously enough.
And men are becoming sensational at bitching. Often even better than sheilahs!
I’m hopeless with names. My wife manages to remember the names of the most tangential of acquaintances. It completely baffles me (and kind of annoys me sometimes).
Mel, I think you may be onto something with Penny Wong, although bearing in mind I wasn’t in the country when the election was on so have literally only seen her in photographs and snippets of video. Thing is, if she could do the ‘congenial’ thing as well as all the other stuff, I think all but the most doctrinaire religious people of whatever type would look past her sexuality.
I’m not making an essentialist argument (although, in line with Gary Becker’s arguments in Treatise on the Family, I do accept that very minor differences in innate ability can have large effects in practice). I’m pointing out that those ‘feminine’ skills taught via things like beauty pageants – and guiding, thankyou DEM, that is classic – are going to be very useful things politically, something we’ve already observed historically.
Why aren’t guys taught this stuff? Until now, it wasn’t necessary. Men had other avenues to power that didn’t require being ‘Miss Congeniality’. What I suspect is that put those feminine skills on a level playing field with traditional male means to political power in a modern democracy, and we may find that – for the first time – the women finish up winning the race.
Simon, sounds like my husband. He does get annoyed and wonders how I remember all this stuff when half the time I forget the car keys or what time of day it is.
Apparently Bill Clinton was really good at remembering people’s names, even if he’d met them only once. I think it’s something which must be very useful if one is a politician. I wonder if Hillary has the same skill? Or Obama?
I remember names, but outside of a fairly narrow time envelope (or if someone relaxes their hair or grows a beard) I forget what they look like! I used to identify Prof John Quiggin entirely by his big ‘Ned Kelly’ beard. When he shaved it off for charity, I could no longer recognise him – despite having walked past him nearly every day in the Economics building at UQ.
My present appearance confuses people who knew me at university, when I had long wavy hair of a totally different colour. When I was pregnant with my daughter, my hair darkened and changed colour totally, so I cut it all off.
I’m not always reliable with names, but I am very good at remembering faces. The difficulty is that when you teach large classes, everyone knows your name, but you don’t necessarily know theirs…embarrassment plus.
I’m not always reliable with names, but I am very good at remembering faces.
I’m similiar, bad at names but can recall faces and am very good at picking up voices over the phone, often surprising people.
Compare and contrast, Marcy. Sarah Palin: conservative christian mother of five and Ms Congeniality; SkepticLawyer: single, libertarian athiest who ‘doesn’t play well with others’. Which side is that then? Genetically female?
It’s just the flip side of strong women being perceived as ‘bitchy’ whereas a man can come across as aggressive in the workplace and get away with it. Successful networking just seems more socially appropriate when it comes from a girl and it’s only been the last decade that ‘networking’ has become perceived as a genuinely useful business skill.
Most of the worst criticism seems to be coming from a certain type amongst the feminist left, who are behaving quite badly because they seem to find Palin’s traditional choices personally threatening. Can’t decide whether it’s jealousy that she hasn’t had to sacrifice her family life for career success as they have (and is possibly more talented) or that they’re feeling threatened that this will move societal pressure towards putting women back in their traditional place.
Libertarians are a good reason why the Left/Right spectrum doesn’t really work as a classifier. They’re typically placed in the “Right” but in some respects exhibit characteristics more traditionally thought to belong to the “Left” (in terms of societal freedoms).
I learned my lesson about this when I dated a libertarian when I was young and naive. I was much more left wing than I am now. We would constantly argue, and I would say, “I don’t like you guys on the Right because you don’t like: [homosexuality, abortion etc] and you do like: [the monarchy, Christian values etc].” He would swifly disabuse me of these misconceptions about his own beliefs, and we found that we had a lot more in common than I thought. It’s just that he was more into market deregulation and lack of government intervention than I was. It was really good for me. He questioned my blind beliefs, which I found quite upsetting at the time, but I think in the long run, it made me a more open-minded accepting person.
So a libertarian will not necessarily have much in common with someone who is conservative like Palin. And they may not necessarily support her.
But whether one is left or right or whatever, I think one cannot help admire the way in which she has handled herself so far – a very powerful woman.
So a libertarian will not necessarily have much in common with someone who is conservative like Palin. And they may not necessarily support her.
No. But in my opinion there’s certain tendencies amongst the Religious Right (and I’m not necessarily including Palin here) that should disturb libertarians more than they seem to.
Don’t sweat it Adrien, the Religious Right are a dying force. Rumour in the Spirit World is that the Holy Spirit has abandoned them and is now advising the Devil to expect the unexpected entrants.
Religious zealots of any stripe (Right or Left) should disturb libertarians, because the essence of zealotry is to restrict freedom.
I ended up in a heated discussion in a cafe-bar in St Kilda a couple of weeks ago in relatio to the transition from college to the work place for young men & women. The emphasis was that that those on the other side of the discussion maintained that it was more difficult for women. I said it was crap but said if I was pushed to generalise, I indicated that I would say in actually fact if anything women can adapt to a change of roles much quicker than men (do a degree; they can resolve not to be intimidated by a challenge and generally communicate & multi-task almost by instinct, where as their male counterparts often rely of unsubstantiated confidence, plain arrogance and were almost competitive by instinct.
To my mind sex made no quantifiable difference in the transition to the workforce from college and that it was a cop out to say sexism (while it might exist) was in anyway a significant factor.
Needless to say I realised the folly of having the discussion with a german lesbian couple! 😉
multi –typos sorry!
Nanu,
A friend of mine who was in the union during my public service days once put this to a female union organiser:
When do we drop the affirmative action for women? When they occupy 50% of positions, 60% … . She wouldn’t answer the question.
Have a look in the offices these days, so many women. Particularly in customer service roles and service industries(eg. employment), women now predominate. One consultant recently said to me that in the Qld public service they can’t get enough men into the workplace, it is being increasingly populated by women.
Yes, it wasn’t that long ago when women got the wrong end of the stick. I honestly don’t think that is now true.
JH –
I think senior corporate positions for example do have an imbalance and I would accept that sexism does play a part, but at the same time alot of that can be attributed to a lack of applicants as much as anything else.
Stalker-
To my mind sex made no quantifiable difference in the transition to the workforce from college and that it was a cop out to say sexism (while it might exist) was in anyway a significant factor.
Not always true. Disgusting behaviour by these fellas from the dog end of the NY finance industry. I wonder what their mothers think of ’em.
Don’t sweat it Adrien, the Religious Right are a dying force.
i dunno about that. The Religious Right (Jewish, Christian and Muslim) seem to be cheerfully and casually talking about, of all things, a global religious war in the 21st century.
Messrs Blair and Bush are both born-again Christians. They never went so far as to issue apocalyptic rhetoric. But I reckon Baghdad looks a lot like St John’s dreams these days.
There is residual sexism in some areas of business (eg, once I had a middle-aged barrister say to me “don’t worry your pretty little head about it” – seriously had to restrain myself from DECKING HIM RIGHT THERE. Instead, I just won the application instead. Ha ha.)
But I also think the lack of female applicants for senior positions (company CEOs, law firm partners etc) can in part be attributed to the desire on the part of many women to spend time at home with their children. I never realised how strong that desire would be until I had children.
I wouldn’t want a job which demanded 95% of my time to the company, firm or whatever. A very large time commitment is required to get to a top position and to stay there successfully.
Therefore I will never be a CEO or a partner of a firm. But it’s more important to me to see my kids grow up – no one lies on her deathbed and thinks “I wish I’d spent more time at work.”
It’s not that women can’t do it but that many realise they don’t necessarily want to.
Of course, there’s always those who do want to achieve those heights, and good luck to ’em too.
But if you plan to have a family and a stellar corporate career – I’d keep in mind that you can’t have everything at once – you’ll end up missing out on family, or you will be unable to give the necessary attention to your career. Or possibly feeling like you can’t give proper attention to anything. That’s fine if you’re prepared to do that – I certainly wouldn’t criticise anyone for making that choice. It’s just that I’m not prepared to do it myself – my current commitments of work, study and parenthood are hard enough!
Blair’s not a born again Christian, Adrien, he’s a catholic convert. I know I’d feel a whole lot better in my mind if we had it legislated clearly that nobody has the right to impose their religious beliefs on someone who doesn’t share them. That would eliminate a lot of the pro-life rubbish which depends on a religious-based argument that ‘life’ begins at conception (or even pre-implantation fertilization in some cases), would be a useful defence against honour killing in asian communities (although it’s actually a cultural practice religion is still used to justify it) and if it means disestablishing the Church of England for fairness, so be it. I’m assuming something similar is the basis for the French system of strict seperation of church and state which is why no religious symbols are allowed to be worn by students in school including the muslim headscarf.
And I’ve worked in enough offices where management decisions were made in the men’s room, to know that sexism in various forms is alive and well.
DEM, the thing that freaks me out is the decisions made in men’s clubs and the like (eg, the Melbourne Club down here). Full of male business types!
LE @ #30
Keep in mind, if a man suggested what you said, he would be called sexist. I omitted that part of my argument in relation to ‘lack of applicants’ on purpose. OK, so I’m a coward! 🙂
I have no doubt that some women would turn on me too as sexist or a traitor to my gender. But it’s true, and I don’t care what they say.
Blair’s not a born again Christian, Adrien, he’s a catholic convert.
My classification error, apologies. It’s the old forgot about why religion and politics shouldn’t be served together thing. He seems to’ve forgotten it. So has Kevvie.
Funnily enough as I recall Jesus advocates the separation of Church and State doesn’t he?
Well it was interesting that Blair chose to postpone his official conversion until AFTER he’d left office even though everyone could see it coming miles away. Seems there still may be some residual concern about having a Catholic national leader amongst the political classes. As far as I know, it’s still illegal to have a catholic monarch but there’s been no legislation against a catholic prime minister (though Disraeli who was Jewish converted to Anglicanism). In the UK there ISN’T a formal separation of church and state – thank you Henry VIII – the head of state/monarch is still head of the Church of England, established as the ‘official’ religion of the country.
Vis WWJD, I seem to remember something along the lines of “render unto Caesar…”
LE, yes lapdancing culture has made it to Britain too and there are bright sparks working in The City who still think it’s appropriate to have meetings there. Turns my stomach.
One Trackback
[…] morning there was a good point, very well made over at skepticlawyer.com.au about the relative skills of men and women. Helen noted that she has now conceded an argument she […]