When I started reading this Oppression piece, nothing really sank in until I read her definition of press. It's kinda a random place for it to start to stick, but something happened. kind of like an eye opening experience.
Why do we have to be molded?
Every person has their "type," so why do others (either out significant others/friends/ colleagues etc) want to morph us into something we are so clearly not?
Why can we only fit into two extremes. You're either a whore or you're a "lady," you either choose to curse like a sailor or be a "lady," you can do whatever is defined as bad or you can choose to be a "lady." Why can't there be middle ground? I consider myself in between the two, so I guess that makes me totally irrelevent along with the majority of all other women in the world.
The topic of cages. This paper came down to cages. Keeping us reduced to what we "should" be, what they want us to be. So, last question. Why do we need to either be a crazy escapee or a prisoner; why can't we be good law abiding citizens? (Because that would be boring, who would oppress us then? Oh, well, I'm sure they could find some other reason to oppress us.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think it's really interesting that you feel that there is a dichotomy present between "whore" and "lady". I like to think there is some middle ground, but largely, there are 'nice girls' and then there are 'sluts'/'bitches'. Really, does it all boils down to submissive and boisterous? Patriarchy doesn't like the people who stir up trouble.
ReplyDeleteNote: Isn't it funny how the 'totally irrelevant' make up the majority of women?