Monday, April 30, 2012

So what you're saying is...

So I read this great article about boundaries the other day by Bob Hamp, entitled "Understanding What People Are REALLY Trying to Say."

The best part of the article (in my opinion), was the section on "Boundary Setting Communication." Hamp states:

"Boundaries are almost always violated at the level of covert communication. An overt statement is made, but it is accompanied by a covert boundary 'bomb.' One example of this occurs when someone makes a crude joke or a sexual innuendo, in a relationship where such talk would normally be off-limits."

People do this in order to test your limits--will you laugh it off as a joke? Go silent? Avoid eye contact?

The way that you deal with such boundary violations is to "[m]ake the covert message overt, and pose it in the form of a question."

Now, I have to say--I think this is awesome, and kinda sorta hilarious when you really think about it. Can you imagine ACTUALLY doing this and seeing the looks on people's faces? 

Well, I'm the kind of person who thinks of the perfect comeback after the fact. I'm also the kind of person who doesn't even realize she is angry or bothered by something until a couple of hours after it happens. I have my own built-in time buffer for strong emotions.

So just for fun (and because I think it's hilarious), I'm going to make the covert overt, and ask a few questions of my own: 

"So, you just jokingly asked which of our other co-workers I contracted a sexually transmitted disease from--it seems to me that you are trying to determine whether or not I am promiscuous. Is that the case?"

"I just told you about an academic honor I received, and you responded by pointing out that I attend an inferior institution of high education. It seems like you're saying that I have not, in fact, measured up to your standards. Is that true? If I were attending Harvard, would you be proud of me then?" 

"You just pointed out that I would be so pretty if I...[fill in the blank]. So what you're saying is I'm not pretty now, but I would be if only I followed your advice and changed my appearance?"

"You just told me about your yearly vacations to Thailand, half-seriously indicated I sit in your lap, and are now playfully cornering me in the aisle of a bus. I could be wrong, but you seem to be saying that you are attracted to Asian women, and I could totally have sex with you if so inclined. True?"

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Girls, Guns, and Beer

When I was a kid, I was in Girl Scouts and my brother was in Boy Scouts. I remember being jealous about the cool things my brother's troop got to do. Why were their activities so much more fun than ours?

Now that I've graduated into adulthood, life is rarely divided into gender specific activities--with the exception of the women's ministry at church.

If you hadn't noticed, churches approach men and women's ministries differently. Take this hypothetical announcement:

"Men, it's time for the [monthly men's ministry event]! This month we will [do something stereotypically female by sharing our feelings and having a good cry] ... Not! We will actually be [doing something extremely manly like shooting guns or lassoing cattle.]"

Wait a minute. Just because I'm female doesn't mean I don't want to shoot guns or lasso cattle. Why are their activities so much more fun than ours?

Well, from the previous non-quotation, I can make the following gross generalizations about men:

Men don't actually want to hang out with each other. They need an incentive (beer, poker, guns). Men do not like to share their emotions. In fact, they are terrified by the thought. Men are afraid of being perceived as overly feminine, thus they define themselves in opposition to the feminine qualities of vulnerability, sensitivity, and empathy.

Women, on the other hand, love to talk about their feelings. Put a bunch of women in a room together, and they will bond [paraphrased from a friend].

I took the opportunity to brainstorm words/things I associate with men's/women's ministry. The results are below.

MEN
WOMEN
Fun
Food
Bros
Bonding
Play
Crafts
Football
Tears
Accountability
Affirmation

These items are pretty funny in juxtaposition. Which would you prefer, football...or tears?

[As an aside, women's ministry events have the BEST FOOD EVER and/or I have cried into some pretty quality mini quiche bites while making hand-painted ornaments that say "Jesus is the BOMB!"]

I also brainstormed words about assumptions men's and women's ministries tend to make about men and women:

The church assumes men are…
The church assumes women are…
Bored
Tired
Concerned with work
Concerned with family
Lazy
Insecure
Disengaged
Overwhelmed
Distracted
Stressed
Lustful
Wounded
Desire entertainment
Desire comfort
Need encouragement to “man up”
Need validation

The assumptions [I'm assuming] the church makes about men seem blatantly insulting. As for the assumptions the church makes about women--

A lot of books, talks, and events seem to revolve around the issue of worth. And that's great. But there's more to women than their need to feel loved.

For a purely hypothetical example, I might be insecure, but also kind of arrogant. I might need validation, but also a kick in the pants. Yes, it's great knowing that God loves me just the way I am, but I also want to do something about it.

In my experience, issues related to worth and self-esteem tend to manifest cyclically throughout the seasons of life. And what brings me out of myself is usually
acting as if I am loved, not the feeling itself. 

As for whether guys bond better by doing things together rather than by having deep, heart-to-heart talks--


My brother is two years younger than me. When we were kids, he was always trying to get me to play with him (maybe other older siblings can relate). On one family roadtrip, my mom taught us how to play poker with toothpicks. My brother was so 
enamored with the game, that he kept the game going long into a night of sleeping in our Jeep Cherokee (it was an interesting trip). 

So yeah. Maybe there's something to it.

Sunday, April 15, 2012

Sex, Text and My Other Body

I'm sure there's a literary/sociological/psychological theory* that addresses this, but I've been thinking about something I can best describe as "my other body."

This is not my actual, physical body, but my symbolic one--not how I experience the world as flesh and blood, but how the world chooses to experience me. Perhaps I can explain.

I might see someone I don't know and based on his appearance alone conclude that he is smart, dumb, nerdy, a douchebag, etc.

Another person might see me and based on appearance alone conclude that I am not American and must be from a different country.

Or a person might view my body as a sexual object, no matter that I am not (an object).

I'll put aside for the moment the question of whether our bodies do have any inherent value, worth, or beauty. Let it suffice for this blog that there are in fact two very different bodies in play. [I imagine someone who saw the two bodies as one and the same would have some kind of body dysmorphia.]

I find this concept extremely helpful as a writer. From the earliest days of literature, writers have identified their works with their own bodies--often as mother or father to an errant child. Anne Bradstreet famously wrote a poem titled "The Author to Her Book" in which she chides the "ill-formed offspring of my feeble brain." In this conception, the work is both intimately associated with the writer's body (as child) and dissociated and excused for its flaws and imperfections (the text as orphan).

Another Renaissance writer wrote of having undergone "pressing" to produce his book (don't you just love a good suggestive pun?). Both of these metaphors indicate the vulnerability (to criticism, etc.) of not only the author, but the author's body.

I'm sure every writer can relate to this in one way or another. You write something. You put a little (or a lot) of yourself into it, then the editor/publisher changes a word here, a phrase there and completely changes what you wished to say.

[I used to metaphorically hit the ceiling every time the school paper came out and the editors had once again marred my flawless copy with one or more grammatical, typographical, or idiomatic errors. Did I mention I was a joy to work with?]

Or someone reads something you've written and takes it completely out of context, interpreting it to mean something it doesn't mean or imputing to you a belief you hate.

And for whatever reason, women's symbolic bodies have always been more vulnerable then the symbolic bodies of men: witness online (or in print) attacks on a woman's looks or sexual history or anatomy, all because she wrote about, I dunno, anything. I can understand why authors like Charlotte Bronte wrote under a male pseudonym. Protection. Safety. No one drawing attention to the vulnerability of your body as female.

I feel this vulnerability--as much as I have tried to protect this other body so intimately associated with my own. I've tried to protect it in the way that I dress (that doesn't really work, by the way). I've stopped writing because a man read my words and thought that he knew me, thought that he could read me, thought that he could take liberties because hadn't I put myself (my body) out there for everyone to read?

I've despaired to think that in the career path I wish to pursue, my male coworkers will see me primarily as the cute girl (with "deep, dark, and soulful eyes," direct quote from one confessional email) and not as competent, smart, or talented.

I know I've been stressing the disconnect between my actual, physical body and this other body, but truthfully, they're not always so disconnected. It's this other body, I think, that causes men to casually touch my leg, my waist, my butt (without, as one friend so memorably put it, even bothering to buy me a happy meal first). It can't be me, right?

I don't know what it's like to be white, male, and heterosexual (a girl can dream), but I imagine there's less of a gap between the way other people perceive you and the way you perceive yourself. I imagine there are fewer moments of disconnect. I could try to primarily see myself as a sexual object, but I think that would get in the way of my writing.


[Based on this, one of the major feats that women in our culture are expected to achieve to become adults is internalizing the male gaze, or viewing themselves as primarily sexually attractive or not. Thus, being sexy is a culturally conditioned behavior that requires seeing a reverse image of yourself (as sexy) and then projecting it back to the world.]


*This might be Lacan and the mirror stage. Or Marx and alienation (alienated from work, from your body, from other people's bodies which then become instruments of production?). Or feminism and the male gaze.