We're Getting Syndicated!

Exciting news. We're really moving into this blog game, full speed ahead. Technorati's tracking us and you can sign up to receive this blog via e-mail with Feedblitz.

If you like what you see here, please pass the word!

Thanks.

Laura

A Feminist Idea?

Child of Troy recently posed the following question on the Social Science : Psychology section of Yahoo Answers:

I read an article about some feminist who wants to get rid of all urinals because they are sexist. She says that if women can't pee standing up, then nobody should. I personally think that's ridiculous (I like the convience of just being able to just unzip the fly of my jeans to pee and standing rather than having to take them down and sit). What do you think (interested especially in what women think).

Knowing that with this, as with everything, it would help to have the whole story before pontificating on the subject, I found out there was more to this issue than what Child of Troy revealed in his question.

Austrian removes 'sexist' urinals
MAZIN ELFEHAID
Associated Press

VIENNA, Austria - An Austrian businessman announced Thursday that he would get rid of urinals shaped like a woman's mouth from a public toilet near Vienna's national opera, after facing pressure from politicians who demanded their removal.

The urinals, which are located in the "Opera Toilet," a lavishly decorated public restroom, feature thick, lipsticked lips, a set of teeth and a bright red tongue.

"We think that it's tasteless, misogynistic and offensive,' Marianne Lackner, media spokeswoman for the Vienna Department of Women's Affairs told The Associated Press.

The department, headed by Social Democrat Sonja Wehsely, said it was appealing to the owner's good will, but was also exploring the possibility of legal action.

Reading this story, I actually of found the idea of the women's-mouth-shaped urinals kind of humorous ― initially. But I can completely understand how many women, not only feminists, would find the concept offensive. Think about what it represents, for crying out loud. Can anyone deny that the symbolism of a man peeing into a woman's mouth is more than a little demeaning?

But most people tend to get way too bent out of shape about stupid things. A lawsuit? Criminal charges? Puh-leeze.

As for Child's personal preference to keep the urinal, of course he wants to! Why would any guy not want it easy? Women want it easy, too. There's even a new device out that claims to allow women to be able to pee standing up, just like the boys do.

Brisbane-based company WhizBiz today said "The Whiz" fits snugly against the body to enable women to "take a stand" like their male counterparts and avoid smelly public toilets and long queues.

Personally, I would prefer to see people spend their time and energy being outraged by truly outrageous things: the fact that AIDS is decimating Africa unchecked; the ungodly number of homelessness in the richest country in the world; teen pregnancy; the dire need for clean drinking water in every nation around the world...

For the record, I am 39, single, female, and have always considered myself a feminist. Unfortunately, being a feminist and being over-reactive are not mutually exclusive.

Ever Been on Yahoo Answers?

There's a great site called Yahoo Answers. Post questions about anything under the sun. Answer them and drive traffic to your site. Some of the questions (and answers) are just stupid, but others are really thoughtful.

Was looking at the Arts & Humanities > Books & Authors category tonight. This was obviously a kid, but I thought it deserved an answer.

QUESTION

What you do if you wrote note to boy and [he] didn't write back!?

ANSWERS

• he was intester in you so you dtill write me and find why he didnt write you
  
• Ask him why he didnt.
  
• move on
  
• depends on what it said. maybe he isnt a big writer, or maybe he isnt interested in what you had to say.
  
• He may be shy or maybe not interested..you can figure that out based on what you know about him..

MY ANSWER

Did he get the note? Maybe he's shy? A lot depends on how old you are. Sometimes a boy likes a girl, but is just too embarrassed to admit it... Why don't you try talking to him in person?

WAIT - What did you SAY in the note????

Temporary Status vs. Permanent Nature

Todd and I talk at least once every day. We've only known each other for six months, but already he knows me as well as anyone...little things like noticing when I have a mild emotional shift to big things like putting up with dramatic mood swings and the ongoing drama between my oldest sister and the rest of the family. Likewise, he tells me I know more about him than anyone . . .

One of his most interesting quirks is his constantly analytical thought process. Even in the midst of banter, he will stop to correct me or point out that something I have said is illogical, contradicts a previous point, or is irrelevant to this particular conversation. This is not nearly as irritating as it might sound to the uninitiated, because it's usually said with love and a whole lot of laughter.

A case in point . . .

Yesterday, during one of our more frivolous conversations, he dismissed a point I was making, and I said to him, "You're a dick."

Understandably, he asked me, "What did you say?"

I said, "You heard me."

At which point he replied that I had now devolved the conversation by calling him an ugly name. He then told me that he never has called me a name like that. I begged to differ. "When?" he asked.

"You've called me a bitch. Twice, at least."

"No, I never did," said Todd.

"Are you kidding? You know you did."

"No. I did not call you a bitch. I said you were 'acting like a bitch.' Completely different from saying 'You're a bitch.'"

"Really? How are they different?"

Here's where the lovely and amazing analytical stuff comes in...even in the midst of light-hearted banter...

"One implies a temporary occurrence: 'You are being a bitch,' as in you're being a bitch right now, but there are plenty of other times when you're not a bitch. The other implies permanence. 'You are a bitch,' means that you have, at your core, some permanent degree of bitchiness ― there are lots of people out there like that."

So...my brain then begins cycling between feeling that I should be flattered to be in the category of the former and not the latter...and trying to decide if he's full of shit or if there really is something to this word splicing of his, a habit which I am generally the one to exhibit, being a professional wordsmith and all.

The truth is...I think I have to agree that, in this instance, at least, Todd is correct. You are being a bitch, a dick, a princess, schizophrenic, Satan, ridiculous, a silly girl . . . is actually quite different from You are a bitch, a dick, a princess, schizophrenic, Satan, ridiculous, a silly girl.

I truly love his attention to detail. For one thing, it keeps me on my toes. The even lovelier part, though, is when I catch him in his own mistakes.

Perhaps We're ALL Tired

Much is being made these days about the way women do things, vs. the way men do things. To a large extent, it's the reason this blog exists. And there is no doubt that the genders do operate differently in many aspects and avenues of life.

So it's no wonder that political pundits such as Maureen Dowd ― a personal favorite of mine ― are taking this post-election opportunity to further examine how women turned out in droves to vote their softer sides/consciences and wound up running the male bullies out of office.

Drapes of Wrath
By MAUREEN DOWD
Op-Ed Columnist
Published: Nov. 11, 2006 ― Washington, D.C.

Because of the power of female consumers, some marketing experts predict we will end up a matriarchy. This year, women also flexed their muscle at the polls, transformed into electoral Furies by the administration's stubborn course in Iraq. On Tuesday, 51 percent of the voters were women, and 55 percent of women voted for the Democratic candidate. It was a revival of the style of Bill Clinton, dubbed our first female president, who knitted together a winning coalition of independents, moderates and suburbanites.

According to The Times’s exit polls, women were more likely than men to want some or all of the troops to be withdrawn from Iraq now, and 64 percent of women said that the war in Iraq has not improved U.S. security.

Not being privy to exit polls, research, or voting demographics ― nor really having the time or desire to be ― I leave the manipulation of the data to the experts. Perhaps more women did vote because they were tired of the white male blowhards in office and decided it was time for a change.

But let me ask you this. Weren't those same people in office last time around? Haven't we had myriad opportunities in the past to vote the geezers out of office? And yet we somehow managed to elect W not once, but twice.

I'm an odd demographic, because I'm a liberal female in my late 30s, but I'm not a soccer mom. Single, professional, college-educated . . . and, as Maureen Dowd would have you believe, voting with all the other women out there. Which is what leads me to suppose there may be a greater general dissatisfaction with things than can simply be boiled down to the fact that women got tired of being bullied and finally went and stood up for themselves ― and their military sons and daughters ― at the polls. Perhaps we all got tired of being bullied.

Perhaps we're all exhausted by this never-ending war, with its casualties both home and abroad.

Perhaps we all have had enough of politics before people.

Perhaps none of it has to do with gender.

Truthfully, I am pleased with and hopeful about the power shift in Congress. But I am skeptical, too. I saw this bumper sticker about 6 months ago:

Republicans │Democrats
Same shit; different piles.
The sad thing is that up till now, it's been true. The Dems are on the precipice of an awesome opportunity to change this perception. Unfortunately, the skeptic in me will not be holding my breath.

Control — Who Needs It?

In a recent post on her Smart at Love blog, Annie Dennison tackles the question of whether it's the women in relationships who thrive on control. She's quite correct in her position that while some women do love to be the sorts of "relationship generals" who make all the decisions in the relationship, control is, in fact, a two-way street.

Here's what I've always known to be true about relationships: they don't work when either person inside of them is always angling for control.

Think about it. Isn't it just challenging enough being yourself? Getting through each day, battling your own innner demons, making sure you're doing the right things, taking action, moving forward, growing spiritually and mentally, staying healthy? I can only speak for myself, but being me is a full-time job, and one I don't always feel particulalry skilled at. Trust me, I can fake it as well as the next person. I generally appear together on the outside, conducting myself well in my business and networking circles — but there are private times when I feel about 5 minutes away from a nervous breakdown.

If I had to guess, most of us are in a similar situation . . . at least once in a while.

So think, then, about merging all those complications that go into making you who you are with all of someone else's complications . . . and it feels miraculous that relationships, let alone successful relationships, occur or exist at all. Add to the mix a partner who wants to control the other . . . and you can rest assured that the relationship — or at least any meaningful connection within it — is doomed.

The thing about control I have never understood . . . from the time my sister's sixth-grade teacher had her thrown out of school because the teacher was too insecure to stand up to a smart, funny, outspoken 12-year old, to reading Annie's post today . . . is why control is so important to so many people. I have quite enough going on in my own life, thank you very much. There is no way I could or would ever dream of wanting to exert pressure or control over someone else's. That's not to say that I never have moments of needing to be right. Of course I do. I think we all do that, from time to time. But in terms of deliberately trying to manipulate, handle, determine, or control the events, actions, or results of a relationship — or organization, business, political agenda — is beyond my understanding.

I am a natural leader . . . and in the areas of my life where I demonstrate this leadership, I choose to lead by consensus. Someone said to me recently that none of us knows as much as all of us . . . and I know that to be true. I don't know everything because I haven't experienced everything, read everything, or seen everything. So how could I deign to lead by control? I want the input of those around me for the very reason that it is valuable; by asking their input, I become a stronger leader.

I once worked at a law firm whose owner employed only attorneys who would kowtow to the party line. He was a strong-willed man, who, on the outside, appeared to be a strong person. But he could not stand to have anyone in his employ who would argue or disagree with him. His need to be right steered his need for control . . . and eventually his legal practice, that had once enjoyed an amazing reputation, lost its footing and became just another law firm.

Power. Fame. Fortune. To pursue any of these alone, as our end goal, is fruitless — because the desire for them will never be sated. Whether it is inside a relationship or in the business world, contrary to what the control freaks believe to be true, control destroys.

In my experience, control is not an issue of gender. It's an issue of insecurity. But the mistaken belief that holding on more tightly . . . forcing someone else to bend to our will . . . will always come back to bite us in the ass.

For more on the amazing concept of Power vs. Force, read David Hawkins' book by that title. You will never view the issue of control the same way again.

My Queendom for a Word — an Inclusive Word

Yesterday, I came across an affirmation I had jotted down a while ago:

"I rule the country of my mind and the kingdom of my life."

I must have first encountered that saying a year or so ago, and I really liked it — the idea of both having control over my life and the view of my life as a vast domain. In fact, I liked it so much that I intended to put it on my wall in giant letters to remind me daily that I do indeed control the vast domain that is my life. But somehow, I never got around to it. Coming across those words now has caused me to consider why I'd never added them to my Inspiration Wall . . . and as I think about it now, I believe it’s less about procrastination and more about my problem with the word "kingdom."

As a freelance editor who makes her living with words, I may be hypersensitive, but the masculine nature of the word "kingdom" really bothers me — not as a word in the English language, but as it would relate to my using it in a personal affirmation for myself.

It’s not that I don’t understand why we defer to the masculine for mixed-gender groups, but it feels to me that using that language is just lazy and sloppy — as we do actually have more inclusive words we could use. If English had no other words to denote mixed gender groups, that would be a different story. As it happens, though, we have lots of words to describe co-ed collectives.

One of my biggest personal pet peeves is when the server a at a restaurant — male OR female — asks, "What can I get you guys?" This is bad enough in a mixed group — but when they are addressing a party of women, I get extremely annoyed. Yes, it's easier. And yes, I know what they mean. But when my girlfriends and I are out — not a guy among us — referring to us as "you guys" is a death knell for any server's tip.

What are the other options? Oh, I don't know . . . perhaps . . .

Are you ready to order?

What would you like to order?

What can I get you?

What can I get you ladies?

What can I get you all?

Now, I understand that invariably, "you all" comes out sounding like "y’all" — which then leads to questions about your southern ancestry and/or familiarity with Hee Haw . . . but I have to tell you, I’d both rather say and hear "yawl" than "you guys" any day.

I realize I am fussier than most about language, but I do believe precision with our words matters. The person who wants to be clearly understood is responsible for clearly communicating what he or she means. The onus is on the speaker/writer — not on their listener/reader to discern the meaning. I am not a guy. Have never been a guy. Will never be a guy. So I feel perfectly within my rights to prefer to use and hear language that describes me appropriately.

I suppose I should apply this thought process to my affirmation, right?

I rule the country of my mind and the empire of my life.

Women's Networking Groups — Men as Interlopers?

As president of a women's networking group in Scottsdale, I have a unique vantage point about the invovlement of men in such groups. ABWA's Scottsdale Express Network has four brave male members, and I currently am courting a fifth, the reason being that I believe men do have a place in women's networking groups.

Much of the current conversation around gender education and training is heavily biased in favor of teaching men to better understand women. You often see the two combined as Gender & Women’s Studies. The pendulum has swung so far in favor of making sure that women’s needs are met that we’ve almost arrived at a point where we could seriously benefit from a course known as Gender & Men’s Studies. Can you imagine the uproar? But the same thing is going on in networking circles.

While it's true that men and women do business differently, as Robin Craig and Norma Ory of Package You can certainly attest to, we live in a world where both genders do business together. So how much sense does it make to completely eliminate the opposite gender from our networking experiences? Even businesses that have been traditionally seen as women's domain — such as skincare — are beginning to see an increase in male clients.

Perhaps the fact that I attended an all-girls parochial high school has affected my perspective on this. They told us that the girls would be more likely to participate in class if we didn't have to worry about the impression we were making on the boys. Although that may be true of high-school students, I am unconvinced that the segregation serves as we move into the business world, and I always welcome men to the table. For one thing, we need men's input for balance. We also need to keep on improving our communicaton and the way we do business with each other.

As with everything else in life, practice makes perfect.

The American Business Women's Association was formed in 1949 by one man and three women. What a remarkable thing if we could mimic those percentages in our membership.