More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Anna David

GET UPDATES FROM Anna David

I'm Part of the Problem

Posted: 10/07/11 06:51 PM ET

When I wrote a piece called "Women Had It Better in the Sixties," I knew it would piss people off. I knew I would be called ignorant. I knew that I was walking straight into a sweat lodge and the heat was about to go up. Still, I didn't expect it to garner 600-something comments (roughly 590 of which seem to be critical) or that I would be the recipient of unintelligible hate mail (I may not have understood their specific points but I understood their main one, which is that they were mad).

To be fair, the essay I turned in was called "Why I Follow Helen Gurley Brown." Still, I understood why the editor went with the title she did. The point I was trying to make with the piece was that a lot of women call attention to how unfair certain circumstances are for us. I'm not saying that they're wrong -- that circumstances are, in fact, fair. I just think that rather than starting groups to, say, catalogue the way there aren't enough women in a certain field, we should be looking at where we can have an immediate, positive impact: by admitting that the situation is tough for women whether we're Fortune 500 businesswomen, stay-at-home moms, or single gals just trying to make our rent. And we can try to have compassion for all of us, no matter which group we're a part of, rather than perpetuating the idea that one group has it "right" and the other "wrong."

And I think that when we create a stink about how women aren't being paid enough or aren't being allowed the same job opportunities as men, we stay angry and are ineffective. I could be entirely wrong about the ineffective part -- for all I know people read these types of Op Eds or hear about these groups, wake up to how unfair everything is, and create new opportunities for women -- but I know that when I vent, I tend to only feel worse; it's when I try to find a solution that I feel better. And when someone who's angry vents at me, I cease to listen: I know they're enraged so I assume they're not being entirely rational. Either way, we don't have a lot of control.

Yet there are certain things we can control: we can, for instance, try to stop finding fault with each other. As a single woman, I can't tell you the number of times I've felt ashamed -- not because of the reactions of men to my situation but because of the reactions of women, women who have made different choices than I have and are clearly far better at navigating relationships than I am. Every time a married mother says, "Wow, you still haven't settled down?" or "Your mom must be disappointed that you don't have a family," I shrink a little bit. It would never occur to me to counter with questions about whether or not they're frustrated by the fact that their career hasn't moved at the pace it did before they had kids or, conversely, to ask how they feel about their kids being raised by the nanny.

So what can we do? Well, we can all try to curb those "concerned" comments that are really masking condescension. And in the professional world, when confronted with decisions like whether or not to put out the message that single women without kids are resentful, sad and bitter -- or to portray the lone single woman on a reality show as the "underdog" -- we could think about the cultural impact these messages may have.

I'm not saying I'm not a part of the problem. I am. I put married mothers with thriving careers on pedestals and am judgmental of the women who rely solely on men for their income -- especially when they make a big show of "working" when it's just some wacky pet project funded by said husband. If I'm being honest, I don't judge them for their lack of ambition (at least not entirely): I judge them because I'm jealous. Because I think they may know something I don't. Because I wish I didn't have to worry about my car and rent payments, because at least a small part of me wants to hear a man say, "Yes, honey, I believe in your dream of creating a business selling lanterns made out of dead flowers and want to help you get started with it."

I don't hate women, as I was accused of by some of my hate-mailers. And I don't hate men -- another accusation. And I wasn't saying in the piece that everything is worse for women today than it was in the 60s (the fact that I wrote "in many ways" seems to have resonated so little that if I could do it again, I might have put it in ALL CAPS). I wasn't saying that all women who don't want to be photographed in sexy clothes have issues with their body; I was merely talking about one.

But none of that really matters; when people are primed for a fight, they see what they want to see. And I was pleased that the article brought up a lively conversation, even if I couldn't bring myself to read a lot of it since my periodically thick skin has a way of crumbling into non-existence when attacks come below the belt. I was happy that Meghan Casserly wrote on Forbes that if I was at her desk, "There would have been some high-fiving happening." But I'm even happier that there seems to be an ever so slight cultural shift. Consider Sara Eckel's recent (and excellent) Modern Love in which she wrote, "Like single women everywhere, I had bought into the idea that the problem must be me, that there was some essential flaw -- arrogance, low self-esteem, fear of commitment -- that needed to be fixed." (The essay ends with the revelation that she didn't need fixing after all; she and her husband recently celebrated their six year anniversary.) The Zooey Deschanel show The New Girl celebrates -- at least sort of -- the single life. A writer in New York who was recently meant to get married ended up marrying herself. While I'm not sure that's the answer -- in my opinion, not that someone who recently received something like 590 negative comments should be in a position to judge -- marrying yourself makes the girl too easy to mock as an example of Oprah-like self love gone too far.

But I do think that loving ourselves -- and each other -- more is the answer. I think blaming the man who's done something wrong, rather than the woman who did it with him, would be a start. I think challenging our primitive instinct to see other women as competition, to be frightened that we've made the wrong choices when we encounter a woman who has what we don't -- could go a long way.

Because the truth is that I can do estimable work and complete myself all I want and still wilt in the face of a Smug Married Woman. Yet I could also at least try to love and understand women who believe different things than I do and have made different choices.

Even the 590-odd ones who think I'm an idiot.

 
 
 

Follow Anna David on Twitter: www.twitter.com/annadavid

 
 
  • Comments
  • 201
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
11:05 PM on 11/16/2011
2 Broke Girls is so much better :)
04:21 PM on 10/18/2011
What I think is: if you had to write another column to clarify, justify, and explain the first one... then the first one wasn't written very well in the first place.

I didn't read this entire article. I read "What I meant was..." several times and each time, I thought, "Well, why the hell didn't you say THAT in the first place?" If you'd written what you actually meant the first time around, you wouldn't be in the position of backpeddling and apologizing for your previous excuse for writing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thinkingwomanmillstone
I'm nervous. My life is under a Micro-bioscope.
04:06 PM on 10/18/2011
The 590 negative reactions about your first piece were correct. This reiteration of your position as victim doesn't help matters. The actions of others can be viewed through a filter of victimhood or confidence...your choice. Every careless or poorly worded comment isn't necessarily directed at your marital or career choices...nor are they meant in a negative way. You can choose to project your own insecurities on the most innocuous of comments and gather your hurts like a bee gathers pollen or you can be confident and content and not give a negative, personal spin to every interaction. If someone asks you "What are you doing this weekend?', they are not usually thinking "you poor lonely spinster you". They are probably just making conversation.
09:04 PM on 10/15/2011
I read that story and I agree with it. This what I took from what she said in the original article. (I'm 31 and married) The definition of "Feminist" has changed. Back then it meant a freedom to make your own choices and to feel beautiful and sexy as you are without feeling judged. Women always have and always will judge each other. It goes back millions of years when they were fighting for the males for natural reasons. Today's definition of "Feminist" is about equality.Yes women should make the same amount as men but in fighting that battle we are loosing other things and that equality battle won't go anywhere until we women treat each other as equals.I'm a SAHM by choice but some Working Moms treat me as lesser because I don't make any money. How can you expect men (and society really) as equals when we aren't treating each other as equals?

An example of that was also in the original article. Married women tend to treat older single women as lesser because they aren't married (or couldn't make their marriage work). A woman is still a woman no matter of the are married/single, a SAHM/a Working Mom, Thin/Obese ect.......we are all equal so start treating each other as equals (meaning quit the judgements) an THEN we might have a better shot about being treated equal by men.
11:44 PM on 10/14/2011
Don't be intimidated by smug and married as if you scratch the surface of these gals, you can find that there is a boat load of insecurities built up in there. I personally believe that women under the age of 50 can never win. If they are stay at home mothers, part-time workers, full-time workers or CEO's there will always be people around to tear strips off them for their decisions and try to bring them down. I think that women over the age of fifty have the family reared or nearly there, or if single or without kids are over the age where people keep asking them about getting married, having kids etc and are therefore left alone to live their lives in the way that they so choose. Men are a different species and they can have families and full time careers and get left alone by society to get on with their lives. I think that we have been doing this for so long that it is unlikely to change anytime soon, so the best advice I have is expect lots of criticism along the way and try to not let it throw you off course. I like to image karma catching up with the meanest of the critics and wielding justice for all those snide hurtful remarks.
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
02:12 AM on 10/13/2011
However much I disagree with her piece, hate mail is simply unacceptable.
photo
Otherday
Chief Imperial Sage, Earth, Milky Way Quadrant
04:58 PM on 10/12/2011
I had the same problem. I said that men had it better in the 1960's and, boy, did the critics let me have it.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Callyson
I don't respond to haters or paid trolls.
01:40 AM on 10/12/2011
Anna,
As one who wrote a criticism on your first post, I found this piece interesting. My reactions:
1. I am with you when you talk about how it is rough for women, whether they're high - powered businesswomen or stay - at - home moms. Ditto for your comments about how we should respect each other's life choices: fault - finding is nothing but a drain on precious energy.
2. Where I still take issue with you: your remark that "when we create a stink about how women aren't being paid enough or aren't being allowed the same job opportunities as men, we stay angry and are ineffective" is a *very* broad generalization that fails to make some critical distinctions. It is one thing to complain about injustice in the world, but then not do anything to change it: that does lead to anger and ineffectiveness. However, when we raise awareness about disparate conditions, and then take action to correct it, we are in fact using our anger in a positive way to effect social change.
In the end, I'd suggest you take your own advice. For some women, empowerment will come from "starting groups to, say, catalogue the way there aren't enough women in a certain field": for others, such as yourself, empowerment will come from a different source. But together, we can make things less rough for all women.
PS: Lanterns out of dead flowers? Go for it--that's what I call thinking outside the box...
03:10 PM on 10/11/2011
Anna, do not be so hard on yourself... Since the dawn of time women have had to balance the wants and needs of being a provider and a professional. In the long run, we men just don't have to make the physical and emotional commitment to a family that a woman makes and for that I applaud you. Keep pushing.... Keeping writing... Keep living...

As always,
Thoughts and prayers...
02:13 PM on 10/11/2011
As one of the 590 (it wasn't hate mail as much as "What are you talking about" mail), I have to say I was pleased to see you respond.

Your plea for love, understanding and reducing competitiveness among women is important, though you undercut your argument a little by tossing in a dig at Oprah.

But what I got out of your message were two things. It's not so much being angry about circumstances that is ineffectual and off-putting. It's when that frustration just seems to manifest itself as whining or complaining, rather than taking action. Anger is okay if it's channeled into something productive. But I have a low tolerance for complaining when a situation could be improved by action. My kids have learned not to complain (at least not around me) about having homework, since I've repeatedly told them that complaining only makes you more bummed about it and extends the time until you've finished it. I remind them they'll feel a little better about it when they see it's halfway done.

It seems like your other point is to not let others -- their insecurities, stress, jealousies, etc. -- allow you to fell worse about yourself. It can be tough, but remembering that what people say usually says more about them than you can be a helpful thing to keep in mind.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gloriaswanson43
Ask and you will get more info.
09:53 PM on 10/13/2011
Ah, someone after my own heart: the no whine zone. Unless it's me, then it's okay.
photo
ThinkLikeALady
Co-Author of Why Do I Have to Think Like a Man?
10:42 AM on 10/11/2011
I read the first article and I read this one. I thought they both were well said. Perhaps many just misunderstood the point.

I agree with this "...we can, for instance, try to stop finding fault with each other. As a single woman, I can't tell you the number of times I've felt ashamed -- not because of the reactions of men to my situation but because of the reactions of women, women who have made different choices than I have and are clearly far better at navigating relationships than I am. Every time a married mother says, "Wow, you still haven't settled down?" or...I shrink a little bit. It would never occur to me to counter with questions about whether or not they're frustrated by the fact that their career hasn't moved at the pace it did before they had kids or, conversely, to ask how they feel about their kids being raised by the nanny"...

We women are notorious for making "slick" statements to make another feel bad especially about being single or unmarried...see my article http://binvegas.hubpages.com/hub/marriedisthenewsingle...where I say something similar. I agree with Ms. David, it is time for us to stop attacking and find ways to uplift and support one another. No persons journey(life) is more profound than the next, we all have a story and struggles to overcome. Be the answer to the problem not part of it. Just sayin'
08:00 AM on 10/11/2011
Anger = Violence, thats what ive been taught to understand. Gues this only proves how violent woman can become when we dont agree with all there views
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
signgrrl
typeface geek
09:48 AM on 10/11/2011
live as a second class citizen your whole life and then get back to us on that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gloriaswanson43
Ask and you will get more info.
09:54 PM on 10/13/2011
Second class citizen?
photo
french queen13
my beloved is mine and I am his
05:19 AM on 10/12/2011
So do you never get angry, or do you resort to violence whenever you are? Do things like injustice and cruelty not make you angry? Do you become violent if they do?

Problem is that women have long been taught we must not be angry, and men have long been taught anger is the only emotion they can acceptably show - and that violence is the outlet for it. Both wrong and both harmful.
04:16 PM on 10/10/2011
I disagree that anger is ineffective. It takes an incredible amount of energy to effect change, and there's a ton of energy in getting good and truly pissed about something. But it kind of does have to be anger of real significance. Anything that can be relieved by venting does not have the depth and energy needed for changing much of anything.

The core issues of equal opportunity, equal pay, reproductive (and health) rights, etc. are great big, societal issues. These are the things that make me and other feminists from back in the day so enraged that we were/are prepared to risk quite a lot to make a change.

Personally, I don't spend alot of energy worrying about married vs. single, children vs. childfree. Been there, done that. In the grand scheme of things, a condescending comment from an insensitive (and probably hugely insecure) fellow female may be annoying and personally irritating. But as threats go - things that are simply unacceptable and cannot be allowed to continue - not in that league. We have bigger issues.

And those bigger issues do deserve your anger and your energy. It is fundamentally wrong to deny someone an education, a job, equal pay or access to medical and reproductive care based solely on gender. That should make you mad. Maybe in the '60's the wrongness was more glaring and therefore easier, but no less wrong today.
abhorson
Si Si Chiquita. There's a woman worth her ransom
02:24 AM on 10/11/2011
"equal opportunit­y, equal pay, reproducti­ve (and health) rights"

Is this the "me-too" movement that came to be called "feminism" ? that's what women 'need' to be happy ? to be just-like-men ?
06:05 AM on 10/11/2011
Would you even ask if it were "black" instead of women? "Equal opportunit­­y, equal pay, reproducti­­ve (and health) rights" should be a given for everybody. How would it make women "just like men"? And no, it is not what women need to be happy but it is necessary to be equal.
05:21 PM on 10/12/2011
For some reason your answer doesn't show up. Anyway I just can't fathom how and why would anybody question "equal opportunit­­y, equal pay, reproducti­­ve (and health) rights" for everybody independently of gender, race, religion and whatever else is there to divide people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pennywhite
12:07 PM on 10/10/2011
I'm sorry you got so much hate mail.
But please enjoy the fact that generating hundreds of comments is a very positive sign - it means you write well enough to provoke a strong reaction in a lot of people. Also - I'm a twice divorced single mom. If you live long enough, you will see the Smug Marrieds fall on their faces, and become better women for it. Hang in there.
maxfax
Taa - dah!