Society - Men and Women

So we've been looking a fair bit at the ideas behind "What is a woman or man?" in class. The world of advertisement has apparently made answering this question incredibly easy. According to the majority of ads, women should be passive, seductive, innocent and, most importantly, physically beautiful (quantified as generally thin except for the breasts and arse). Men on the other end should be the epitome of strength. Be it physical, mental or emotional, true or not.

Now naturally we look at these ideas and see them as ridiculous and we should. At the same time though we have to ask ourselves... where did the media get these ideas from in the first place?

Think faster Bobo!

I never took a psychology or family studies course, but I did have the privilege of reading over someone's shoulder during theatre rehearsal. The book was all about what men look for in women and what women in turn look for in men, but essentially how relationships function between the two. Not reading the entire tome, one experiment did stick out. In it men and women were shown individuals of the opposite sex wearing a  fast food uniform, clean casual clothes and a suit. For men, the study showed that they were more attracted to the women of greater physical beauty regardless of their attire. Women were more likely to be drawn to an unattractive man in a suit than an attractive one in a fast food uniform. Conclusion.

Women are more likely to be attracted to men of status.
Men are more likely to be attracted to women of physical beauty.

Some people have already realized this.

Now these weren't set in stone rules, however the trend was very much apparent. If it is true it's a pretty depressing statistic because it correlates precisely with the messages put out by advertising. Before jumping to the conclusion that this mindset is "because of the ads"... what if they're just holding a mirror up? Sending the message back that we're giving off, we pick it back up from the media and it becomes this big cycle. Evolutionary speaking it makes sense. Dominant men would be more likely to survive (passing resilience to their offspring) and more "attractive" women were more likely to be fertile.

Similar ideas can be seen in today's society, with the stereotypical idea of the man needing to be providing more for the family financially, the woman often transitioning to a "stay at home" parent more often than the male. These are troubling ideas because it causes men to blindly seek ambition solely for the sake of ambition, and forces women to believe that image is everything. Are these ideas right? Definitely not.

The real question we should be asking is whether we are able to escape these apparently instinctual ideas of "man and women" or if it's hardwired into our nature. Being a bit of an optimist I would like to think yes it is something we can move away from. A great deal of change has surfaced in the past hundred years with women leading a much more active role in society (being able to vote in Canada in roughly 1917). This change can actually be further exemplified in recent society. Just a few months ago British Prime Minister David Cameron went on paternity leave. A random example I know, but at the time I was shocked. However, after thinking it over, I realized how respectible such a decision was. The existence of paternity leave in itself demonstrates a lessening of the gap between the traditional roles of men and women.

Whether or not men and women will ever be considered complete equals I'm not sure. Not that one will be superior to the other as a whole, but in specific circumstances perhaps (would you prefer a women or a man to babysit your children?). It's understandable for some discrepancy because women and men are physiologically different (not that one is smarter than the other, but think differently? Definitely). I do believe however that we can lessen this gap significantly by challenging the ideas of "men" and "women". Women should be allowed to push themselves towards ambition, while men shouldn't be afraid to take a step back (which I feel is probably the more difficult change society has to face, easier to strive for power than relinquish it). More importantly though is that members of the opposite gender must also be open to accept these role reversals.

There will always be those who would challenge this change, but ultimately I feel that it is much wiser for one to not only be open to change, but encourage it. New ideas need space to breath and grow to come to fruition, especially if this truly is a world of becoming. I'm not talking about an overnight instantaneous change, but society can aim towards true equality step-by-step. If a society's ideals are defined by the beliefs of the majority, then we must change our own individual beliefs so that they may one day catch like wildfire.

"Be the change you want to see in the world." (Ghandi)

Never stop questioning.