We’re sitting in class. WantToBiteMyNipples? tells me: you should write about our lecturer in your blog. It didn’t hear exactly what she said, but it was something along the lines of girls choosing “softer” subjects than men. This, to say the least, makes WantToBiteMyNipples? and me pissed of. Why is it so often that people talk about women with a patronizing tone?
I went to this Danish media festival with an awesome title – Fagfestival (http://www.fagfestival.dk/). It costs like thousands of Dkr to get in, but since we’re studying @ the Danish School of Journalism (http://www.dmjx.dk/international/) some of us were granted a free entrance.
All of the sessions that were given in English were more or less worth seeing and enriching. But the one that stuck out was given by John Peet. This is a rare instance, explained by the organizers: “Employees at the powerful magazine The Economist rarely agree to speak at media conferences, but the magazine's European editor (…) has made an exception.”
Why did I remember him in this context? He’s the kind of arrogant prick that I love. As well as love to hate. He inspires. When asked why won’t they write credits for the article, he simply states that once a journalist develops his name brand, he starts asking for more money, which is just inconvenient. Makes sense, right? Haha.
But the thing that struck me was the discussion between Peet and the audience about the readership and magazine’s target audience. One of his central statements was something along the lines of “women don’t give a shit about politics. Mostly men read the Economist. Women are interested in ‘softer’ topics than economy, world politics and international relations”. People who’ve ever discussed anything similar with me know that after such statements I turn into an enraged bull.
However, he somehow managed to say it in such an arrogant and ignorant way that it made me want to work for him. Perhaps it’s some domination issues that I have, but it felt like a challenge. And it’s not often that negative comments trigger me in a positive way; it gave me an impetus to challenge him back.
Perhaps it’s because I new he couldn’t be more wrong – most of the women I know read the Economist. Very few of the men I know read the Economist.
Men have become lazy instead of becoming more competitive, whereas women are marching forward with god’s speed.
Wake up, boys.
"Why is it so often that PEOPLE talk about WOMEN with a patronizing tone?" that's just one funny slip of a tongue. :]
ReplyDeleteabout that prick from the economist - he's, sadly, quite right. of course, many inteligent ladies, who go for high posts and interesting carreers, do read it - and you do know many of them.
but most of the women Ūwhom you don't know, because they're of no interest to you, and i have no idea where you could meet them) are a distance from Lithuania to south pole to the concept of carreer woman's life named above.
and then there are exeptions from the rule: housewifes or low profile workers interested in Lybian revolution correlations to oil markets and germany's government incentives for green companies, renewable energy development in new zealand etc etc. very very rare exeptions.
we musn't forget, most of the leaders in this world are tall white/caucasian dark haired attractive men. and if they do not read the economist, they do have it on their dark oak office desk just to prove their belonging to certain stratum. and their secretaries fill in the subscriptions every january, so that the dark oak desk wouldn't miss a single number of the economist.
so who actually READS that outlet? knowing it's like 120 pages weekly, no busy businessman can have that much time on their hands. university professors, international relations students, not so busy government clerks (not many of them, though), retired people... and shadow ministers (i meant people who make politics and care about what's written in the press.
so, screw that prick, he's interesting mostly only to himself.
i realise that your point was 'women are moving forward and men are becoming lazy cowards', and i kind of drifted away.
but i guess, men can stay in their lazy cowards moods for very, very long until things will noticeably change. I mean, it's programmed deep in our unconscious (i've read too much Malcolm Gladwell books lately, and that's your fault :))
bisous
barauskis
Thanks, Ieva, for taking the time to write this. I need more commentators like you - I find it inspiring and productive.
ReplyDeleteI'm dead tired after a 20-hour day of walking around the city, so I'll try to be concise yet accurate.
Regarding the slip of the tongue - reminded me of something - in Zemaitija, they call boys "vaks" [vaikas] and girls "mergike" [mergaite]. I guess it's just set deeper in my subconscious than I thought ;]]
Regarding women and the readership of the Economist. I still think it's very relative and depends on how you measure. If, for example, you were to estimate the percentage of people with a high IQ in Lithuania and in the U.S. you would most probably find that the % is more or less equal. However, as there are far more people in the U.S. you are much more likely to bump in to stupid people than you are in Lithuania (and the density of population is only one of many factors for that).
Therefore it is, to my mind, very difficult to determine whether it is men or women who are generally more interested in 'serious' matters. Have you heard of the 'girl effect'? It explains very well the power that every girl holds, which men do not (and cannot) posses. That's why it is so important to invest and foster girls' education.
As to READING the Economist - who reads anything from cover to cover nowadays? I personally think it's a waste of time - one should only read what is relevant to her/him. That's where ADHD may come in handy as you can use it for effective text skimming.
I do agree with your point that it may still take a while until we can see a noticeable shift from patriarchal structures, but my point is that it WILL happen and it's unavoidable.
And I am glad you enjoy Gladwell. However, you owe me a recommendation ;]]
bisou bisou ;]]
cijauskis