This post has made the top twenty of a local blogging competition. If you enjoyed the post, I'd be most grateful if you could drop me a vote for it. If you've been bitten by more than a little Schadenfreude, however (the grand prize is a MacBook), I can see where you're coming from.In any case, my contestant code number is B19, and voting goes on over here. Better yet: you can fill up the form right here!
I/C number required to prevent multiple votes from the same voter. Email addresses and telephone numbers will not be spammed, but if you are really uneasy they are, as indicated, entirely optional fields.
Voting closes on 24 May 2007 at 2359 hours. Random voters (who have chosen to provide contact details) will be picked to receive the following prizes:
5 x $10 Borders Book vouchers
10 x $10 Miss Clarity Cafe food vouchers
10 x $5 Uzumaki ice cream vouchers
10 x $5 Matsu apparel vouchers
3 x $10 Pitstop Cafe food vouchers
More incentive to vote. :)
NOTE: If, like Jol, you do not wish for your IP to disclosed, feel free to email me with your I/C number and FULL name. Telephone numbers and email addresses are optional, unless you want to win the prizes listed below, in which case they will be compulsory (in which case you might as well submit directly via the form provided, since you are giving up quite a great deal of privacy already). I will then submit the vote on your behalf. I may be reached at thegreatsze@NOSPAMgmail.com.
Thanks for looking again!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do not read this post in the way your mind wants to read it. There is no black and white.
***
I know some girls who think that the only way to troubleshoot their computer problems (hardware or software) is via the millionaire method: Calling A Friend. This friend, invariably, proves to be male. These girls do not think to Google, or to at least find out more information about the specific problem on their own.
I also know of girls who list their hobbies on Facebook on Friendster in the following fashion: "Wakeboarding, Shopping, Chillin', Sleeping, EATING (haha tho I can't do this so much these days, getting fat!), Watching TV (I heart Kwong Sang Woo!!), Tennis and Golf (juz started but quite fun!)".
There is a common thread to all of this. These girls are mediocre, in every sense of the word. I will not say that they are lousy; just mediocre. They expect little from themselves. "Wakeboarding" is a hobby to them because they've done it once over the last 6 months; "tennis" is a hobby to them because they like the feeling of a furry ball going off their racket strings, regardless of trajectory. "Sleeping" and "eating" are more than bodily functions and necessities; they, too, qualify as a hobbies, because these actions are somehow special and unique to these girls. It is interesting that "shitting" and "peeing" do not make these hobby lists. Perhaps "shitting" is less important to these girls than "eating", though the symbiotic relationship between these two actions is difficult to overlook.
Computer problems are the exclusive domain of their tech-savvy male friends; never does it occur to them that perhaps technology isn't as indecipherable as they think it to be. They do not think: If I drive a car, I should learn about its maintenance and upkeep. If I utilize technology on a daily basis, I should familiarize myself with it above and beyond just consuming. They wail instead: "But why? I have my brother / father / uncle / husband / boyfriend to do it for me." And this wail is final, a comprehensive answer to life's vicissitudes.
This is not an exercise in misogyny. Rather, it is a general diatribe against modern society. We - and by this, I mean both men and women - have unconsciously conspired to allow mediocre women to stagnate happily in their mediocrity. I do believe that we are all born mediocre, save for the talented, God-gifted few. All is hard work. Society exerts a positive pressure on men to get good at things, to "deal with it", to yaru (to do with a view to improving). Conversely, however, there is no such expectation on the female in society; the damsel in distress is a stereotype precisely because art imitates life. The woman, the lady, the princess, she is admired for little that she does; she only has to suru (to do, period).
This is not just the fault of the female, though it is arguable that she has let herself down by falling so comfortably into the unchallenging role that society has carved out for her. It is the fault of us all; we prize female beauty to such an extent that all else that she does has no real effect on our judgment of her. It is of course our loss; when an entire gender expects little from its collective self, it is the entire species that suffers.
Caveat time. There will always be indiviual examples of brilliant females. Marie Curie, Helen Keller, Florence Nightingale and Virginia Woolf. But these names do not roll off the tongue as easily as Picasso, Thomas Edison, Shakespeare and Michael Jackson. You will say: "That is because much of history has been written by men. Men do not allow women to get in on the act. It is the men who prevent women from rising above their mediocrity." And to this I will say: you are right. Men were the root of the problem - and women compound it actively (and yet passively) by acquiescing, even now. Both genders have to work together to remove this expectation trap.
A friend pointed out, during our discussion on this topic, that men and women just perform different roles. Men fix the inanimate (arimasu - non-living things), while women nurture the animated (imasu - living things). But increasingly women have to fulfill neither role. Women are fully entitled to have careers now, in modern society; no one will begrudge a woman who chooses not to have kids. Men, on the other hand, have it thrust upon them to communicate well, to get in touch with their feelings, and yet at the same time fix everything that is mildly technological, to be strong, a bulwark, a pillar of support for the entire family unit. It is no surprise that most men fail in this demanding role.
It is not enough to just say that "Oh, girls are no good with the technical stuff", and "We girls are good at some things, you boys are good at others." What are you good at? Really. What is your demonstration of value? My father, not my mother, used to sew my name into my handkerchiefs when I was a boy. I can cook, poorly, but it is edible and it satisfies me. But what are these mediocre girls good at? And would they do what they are good at on a regular basis, without grumbling? And voluntarily? If I ask a girl to cook for me, will she? If I fix her computer for her, will she bring me a nice steaming bowl of lasagna to me? Or will I simply be laughed away at just having that expectation?
The female has settled so comfortably into her role in society that it appears that she has all but disappeared between the cushions. If I put down "wakeboarding" as one of my hobbies, or "bowling" (I suck at it), my male friends will laugh me to hell and back, and afterward the label of "poseur" would naturally affix. There is no corollary for the female. The truth is, many girls have no hobbies. They do not pursue a sport, they do not have something that drives them daily apart from their office obligations. It is the way girls are socialized from a young age. They are taught to be mindful of institutions, to be prim and proper, to colour within the lines. Who can blame them for not investigating the world outside of the bounds prescribed by society? Life is "Office", "School" (even ECAs are stipulated by authorities and institutionalized) and "Home"; "Career", "Exams" and "Family". It is a stark trichotomy. Where is there room for rock-climbing, for armchair philosophy, for electric guitar, for astronomy? Sure, girls are happy to dabble - salsa classes, yoga classes, maybe an odd hobby course here and there; but generally there is no follow through. There is no real interest either; it is a lifestyle choice, because to be able to dance is good for social life; to be slim is good for appearances; to have experienced life as much as possible is "living" according to the advertised ideal, however superficial the experience. There is little true passion, save in a few exceptional cases.
All my male friends have one passion or another: tennis, squash, football, frisbee, chess, magic, pedantry, writing, model kits etc. You name it, and there will be a male out there doing it. Girls will say at this point: "We are passionate about fashion and make-up!" I would laugh at this, except that the statement is too, too true. Once again the superficial is prioritized - not just by these girls, but by society at large. We would rather LOOK at these girls than DO with them (that came out wrong, didn't it).
As for the mediocre female - she has done her sums and acted rationally. I do not kid myself to think that men pursue their passions with not a seed of status-augmentation in their minds. That will always be there. So, accordingly, what is in it for the female to put in effort, to be passionate about anything? What is in it for her to demonstrate a capacity for intelligent conversation, to hold interesting opinions, to engage in any unique activity? If she's already pretty she's got it made; if she's ugly, nothing she can do will help her (save plastic surgery, but I will leave that discourse to other bloggers). So, she plows on in her mediocrity.
If you are one of those girls who has a hobby, who lives for something that you can call your own, if you are one of those girls who does for yourself or at least tries in earnest to, then you are not mediocre. I did not write this with you in mind. Go out and do what you love to do; that will be spreading the word enough.
***
When I first banged this post out, I knew what I wanted to say, but I wasn't sure why I wanted to say it. I thought to myself - "There you go again, gender issues as usual". But now I have an inkling. These mediocre girls that I talk about, they are but the most visible and extreme manifestations of a national affliction. Singaporeans on the whole haven't yet quite started greeting each other with "Are you making money?" yet (that is the standard greeting - moukarimakka - in Osaka), but we aren't all that far off. We don't just have mediocre girls; we have mediocre boys, women and men as well, and importantly, we have them in disproportionate amounts.
We are in a tight position, geographically and economically speaking; it has been drilled into us that for our country to survive in this region, we have to embrace the working life. Our roses have lost their scent, for want of smelling. But watching my peers slave to midnight on weekends so that they might be one of the first few to purchase the new Louis Vuitton Batignolles Horizontal, I cannot help but feel a disconnect. Survival? Excess, rather.
There is time, I believe, for some enjoyment; there is time for real passions. Cyprus has a population of 800,000; but just last year, Marcos Baghdatis, a Cypriot, reached the final of the Australian Open and the semi-final of the Wimbledon Championships. Cyprus isn't exactly an economic powerhouse, but now they have a man they can worship, an idol their youth can emulate, a living embodiment of hope for all their countrymen to rally around. Which is a whole lot more than can be said for us here in Singapore.
Transition does take its own time, to be fair. So the best we can do now is to start telling our youth some very, very different things; or better yet, to tell them nothing at all.
Posts
104 comments:
i actually enjoyed reading this!
maybe some girls enjoy being useless (or don't bother to work on whatever) so they can be rescued by men like you. make you feel good so you can write garbage about them and then fall hopelessly in love with them?
definitely. which is why I say men are part of the problem too.
incidentally, I am flattered that you say "men like you"; to be honest, I don't think I'm big enough of a man to qualify, really.
Gah you chauvinistic pig! But I like your direct approach to the matter on hand. Very entertaining. =D
It’s interesting the way you mock mediocrity, yet applaud your brother’s “what’s wrong with second best” approach to life and constantly put people who spend their lives trying to achieve perfection in their work down.
Ooo. Zing! But I think it's just a question of what they really want in life I guess. People who don't want to learn how to better control the things they use so often in their lives will eventually get screwed by their reluctance to improve, regardless if they have breasts or not...
We girls are good at getting men want us. Even though that's not the reason for our existence , we are good at that. Besides, men love to "protect" women, to increase their big ego. So, that's what we are good at. Acting like we don't know anything to make men feel so damm good bout themselves.
nyx: haha thanks. I'm not sure if MCP is the right term though. I'm not nearly gallant enough.
m: asked and answered.
zu31g: you think? they just blame those whom they expect to help them. few men are as abrasive, small, self-righteous and confrontational as I am - so no, I don't think they will get screwed over much (let's not read into the innuendo).
girls: what makes you think men draw validation from helpless and incompetent women? what makes you think I want affirmation from someone I can't respect? I never got your logic of "acting like you don't know anything so the man will feel good about himself" - why do you think so lowly of men, and worse, yourself? why do you allow your personal behaviour to be circumscribed by what you think men want or like?
or are you really just an orifice, in every sense of the word? look at you: you behave disingenuously so that you can ostensibly make men - a gender you don't seem to think much of - happier. the fact is, no one is truly better off. you're spiteful of him, and he thinks you're useless. all that manipulation comes to naught. what then is the point?
What makes you think that women think lowly of themselves, or more correctly, what makes you have the perception that I think lowly of myself? An act is merely one's public self to fit into this superficial world.
More often than not, men underestimate others or more specifically women and overestimate oneself. I still love men and therefore do not think lowly of men. However, I strongly believe that men are “ego-beings” who are often so full of themselves. Trust me, everyone enjoy praises, recognition and credits, especially men. The MCPs.
Being able to please men by merely keeping quiet or acting dumb may create a happier world. Even though most feminists will not place themselves at a “lower” position to please men, but what’s the point of having a MCP and a feminist proving their worth in this society? Besides the point of acting stupid, most women do not have to prove or gain credits for whatever she does or knows. We value the virtue of humility and modesty.
** What’s your issue with girls having hobbies which they simply enjoy? Life is about enjoyment not merely accomplishment and achievements. You don’t have to be good at something to enjoy them.
I agree completely where the generality of Singaporean women are concerned. But this doesn't sit easily with your proclamations that women should be demure and your tendency to ascribe the greatest value to women who look good and shut up. Doing stuff is messy. You'll never be that perfectly poised, beautiful creature that you've always praised in the past if you aim to be someone who does stuff. You'll never be that mysterious being who is attractive because "different from men" (as you once said on this blog below a pic of your girlfriend applying makeup). Have you changed your mind about these ideas? If so, I'm very glad for you; if not, maybe you need to give women more room to be the people you here say you think they should be?
Oh please.
girls:
"What makes you think that women think lowly of themselves, or more correctly, what makes you have the perception that I think lowly of myself?"
The fact that you, as I have said, 'allow your personal behaviour to be circumscribed by what you think men want or like'. The fact that you manipulate by acting dumb, and think that you should be given a pat on the back for that.
"Trust me, everyone enjoy praises, recognition and credits, especially men. The MCPs."
Go ahead and praise us. Nobody said you couldn't. Must you be helpless and incompetent before you can issue praise? I know -I'd- value praise from someone who was competent a whole lot more than praise from a useless duffbag.
"Being able to please men by merely keeping quiet or acting dumb may create a happier world. Even though most feminists will not place themselves at a “lower” position to please men, but what's the point of having a MCP and a feminist proving their worth in this society? Besides the point of acting stupid, most women do not have to prove or gain credits for whatever she does or knows. We value the virtue of humility and modesty."
Then what are you doing here, arguing your case? The fact that you disagree with my opinion makes me have a very low opinion of myself; my ego is now deflated. Why do you not keep quiet and act dumb, and allow us to have happiness in this world, as you say? What is the instinct that makes you want to speak up against me? How do you reconcile that instinct with your exhortation for your brethren to "keep quiet" and "act dumb"?
The truth is, your valuation of "humility and modesty" is facetious. These are the feel-good tenets you turn to in order to justify your intellectual laziness. It is glib self-deception. But you cannot stay that way for long. You want to say things, to do things, to be more than just mediocre. Hence you speak up here; and hence you should be doing out there.
In any case, you are changing the parameters of discussion. You have, as I warned at the start, read this post with a cognitive bias. My post had mediocre women and girls in mind; I never said feminists were the answer. I never defended the MCP. I just want damsels in distress to learn to help themselves, and silly girls on Friendster and Facebook to amount to more than "sleeping" and "chillin'". And most importantly, for the men who adore these women to learn how to see - and expect - more than the superficial from them.
"What’s your issue with girls having hobbies which they simply enjoy? Life is about enjoyment not merely accomplishment and achievements. You don’t have to be good at something to enjoy them."
This is a value judgment. Let's say I suck at basketball (which I do). I go and play it. I never get the ball, no one passes to me, and I shoot air balls every time I have a chance at the basket. Did I enjoy myself? No. Do I enjoy watching bad movies? No. Do I feel that I should put up "basketball" and "bad movies" as my hobbies / interests on Friendster or Facebook? Double no.
The danger is that in choosing to "enjoy" - at a very base level - all kinds of activities under the sun, these girls (and note it is a specific subset, and not -every- girl) wind up with passion for really nothing at all. Their experiences are superficial one-offs, ad-hoc and non-continuing. There is no consistent outlet for their time and interest, so the television / YouTube takes over. It happens. These girls say they have many hobbies and interests, but inevitably they just wind up watching Grey's Anatomy with a Ben and Jerry's tub.
Then there is nothing constructive anymore; they girls become passive receptacles, imbibing everything but engaging nothing. Value judgment again, but I'd prefer the company of someone who knew more than just CSI or Heroes.
Jol:
It is ladylike to mind etiquitte; it is not ladylike to flail haplessly for help at every turn. I don't see why a girl cannot be good at putting on make-up and at the same time have another hobby, or to know how to format her computer. I am a man, I am expected to kill cockroaches, but I am also expected to pay compliments to the woman in my life when she cuts her hair. Things aren't mutually exclusive.
Men are definitely part of the problem, it is true; and I am certainly as guilty as the next bloke for propogating all the wrong expectations of women. You - of all people! - should know that I'd rather spend an afternoon with an articulate, interesting female with passions (not that sort) than with a pretty orifice.
Mesp:
How polite.
In short, you are describing the perfect female. Where are you going to find a girl who pwnz at tennis (or whatever activity), recites poetry, is beautiful, panders in your toy obsession (amongst others) and insecurity, who herself is secretly insecure in spite of her perfection, and who is able to make you feel like the king of the world? If you do come across her, please intro. I might even consider jumping ship. :P
hai, you bring my points to logical extremes.
you don't have to pwnz at tennis, you just have to be more than a once-in-six-months competency, if you so choose to proclaim it as a hobby on your personal profile.
you don't have to recite poetry, you just have to have the capacity to understand it should it be thrust upon you, and to respond intelligibly to it (as opposed to a slurred "huh .. think so much for what").
you don't have to be beautiful. really. (being fat is a different matter altogether, because to the extent that we have normal genes and can control our weight / diet, fatness is a function of how much self-discipline and self-respect we have.)
you don't have to pander to any of your man's obsessions. you just have to understand that men in general have other things in their lives - football, computer games, whatever - and that they need time and space for these things outside of their women.
you don't have to be insecure - humility, as "girls" puts it, would be more than sufficient.
and of course, I am looking for the perfect female, or what I can come to call -my- perfect female. aren't we all?
Why is it necessary to be "ladylike" (or "manly") at all? Why isn't it enough to be a healthy, interesting, good, all-rounded person? I'm not saying it's impossible to like to do some traditionally "girly" stuff and also be a human being. I'm saying it's impossible feel deeply obliged to do certain things just by being female and also be much of a human being. (It's slightly different for men because the whole point of being "girly" is docility and languid passivity.) Remember your post about how wonderful, how gloriously self-sacrificial, it is when women won't try something because they're scared of what their boyfriend would think? And your comments about men having to "protect" and "take care" of women, and how great it is when women are soft and dependent?
Of course, I say again, if your views have moved on since all that other stuff, then from the bottom of my heart - thank you and well done, it's really quite an achievement. But I guess I'm just wondering aloud if you're aware that this is a shift, and that the dance has to match the tune? I would also add, for most of your female peers, it's probably too late - they've already been screwed over by 20+ years of upbringing and reinforcement.
Jol: You know, you are right - it is not necessary to be ladylike if you are female, or to speak Chinese if you are of Chinese origin. I guess I just left that in there subconsciously because I -know- my theory and practice won't gel. So, I screw up my theory first.
It probably is too late. But all the battles worth fighting are the losing ones anyway.
I guess I just left that in there subconsciously because I -know- my theory and practice won't gel. So, I screw up my theory first.
:)
"Singaporean men marry foreign women because they are losers.
Singaporean women marry foreign men because Singaporean men are losers."
i smell a party... and some sarongs!
Caveat: There's always someone different (as you said). I happen to know of a girl who runs a tuition centre while studying (and she's having her IA now). Mind you, holding down two jobs at once is quite hard.
At the time being, I'm just searching for whatever I want to do in life. Compared to her, I'm nothing much, and I'm a guy.
I also know of other guys. They slack throughout their study semsters, take money from parents (when they could earn pocket money during the holidays instead), and don't really know where they're going, and don't really care.
That's how some people are, regardless of gender. Though women have it easier since the desire to procreate (read: sex) is stronger in guys, thus women will always be able to rely on others (unless she's not pretty or old).
someone: You seem to think that day job (or schoolwork) = more than mediocrity. That's not what I meant. Girls were always the first to finish their homework in school, and women are always the most industrious workers at the office.
But the most capable, hardworking (at the job) woman or man can still be mediocre, because they do not show an appreciation for life outside of the lines that have been sanctioned by government/society. If your conversation with somebody can only go along the lines of who does what and who earns what and yada yada, then I would say that you are in mediocre company.
In any case, there are definitely some very mediocre men out there. No question. But for men, there is an automatic censuring mechanism. Men are laughed at, teased, even jeered when they fall short of the male ideal, when they prove to be mediocre. Look at aga's comment. We are losers if we fail to measure up; our women turn elsewhere.
There is no corollary for the female. If a woman is mediocre, it is accepted as is. Nobody will go up to a woman and say, "Huh? You're 25 years old and you still don't know how to operate the VCR?" It is this difference in expectation that explains my post's slant.
(I didn't bother reading the comments above.)
Even though I don't necessarily agree with your article in entirety, I have to admit that sadly and very disappointingly, your description of the so-called "mediocre girls" is spot-on.
I am a girl and interestingly after reading this, I realised that I am very much surrounded by mediocre guys.
Just noticed a link to this post at the bottom of the page posted by another "veron" that spells "think" as "tin", "that" as "tat", and so on. Due to my own insecurity, I feel a need to point out that I'm a different Veron. Clicking on my name leads to a different page than hers.
veron: Some guys around might be "uninteresting" to you, but I doubt they are "mediocre" in the sense that thegreatsze used to describe girls.
Girls are unproductive and just consume. Passiveness. Guys work, earn money, produce, make sure society works.
As a commenter noted, girls just want to attract guys. Probably to support them financially. In exchange for sex and ego-massaging, presumably. Guys don't have to be masculine, adventurous, sensitive, or whatever it is that make guys "interesting". Just have to have the cash.
So. thegreatsze is something wrong with this picture.
Girls should not post stuff like "My hobbies are sleeping, tennis (even though I have only played once in 6 months) and watching The O.C."
Girls nowadays = underachievers in contributing to society (except to consume and provide sex)/gold diggers
You know you've been Tomorrow'd every time the number of comments spikes.
I agree with most of your views, at least the first half. I did not finish the entire article as I have had such long discussion with friends some 10 yrs ago. Very similiar findings.
One different point is that, what you have written describe a typical Singaporean female. It is not longer true once you leave this red dot.
SG female are in general mediocre. Once you spent some yrs overseas, you cannot disagree with that.
Re: Jol's point: Materialism, I think, is a desire for a better standard of living taken to an extreme.
If you drive a Lexus and say you want a better car, you're more likely to be considered greedy than if you drive a Daihatsu Charade and express the same sentiments (I don't know much about cars - hopefully this example is good).
I think guys are more obsessed with girls than girls with guys, actually.
Friend's nick: "girls don't like boys, girls like cars and money."
Another friend's nick: "boys don't like girls, boys like boobs and vaginas"
kevin: I think the same can be said of Singapore guys as well.
veron: It's very understandable that you didn't bother to read all the comments. My comment just before yours, however, addresses the point about mediocre men. Put quickly, men have an automatic censuring mechanism for falling short, whereas women do not have that equivalent (save for the more right-thinking members of society such as yourself). Hence the bias.
Anyway, your design skills are very good; I dun tin tat u r wrong for feeling that you're surrounded by mediocrity! :)
job: I find it difficult to parse your tone. Are you being ironic or earnest?
At this juncture I can only respond to your ostensible stance, which is that men want pussy and women want money. While there is a broad truth to this, it is not related to my original post, which basically states that SOME girls expect too little of themselves. I did not intend for it to be your usual gender debate.
kevin and veron: Both of you make the same point, that basically, Singaporeans are a mediocre lot. I am happy to commiserate in this. We are not a curious, inquisitive and passionate people. The emphasis, as David Marshall says, is on the rice bowl. (Or, to be more accurate, the gold-plated, silver-gilted rice bowl.) Once again, the bias of my post was engendered by the lack of a self-censuring mechanism for mediocre women, as opposed to for men (who are readily lampooned by their peers, male or female, when they fail to live up to standards). Please see comment above for clarification.
aga: You had a post similar to this a while back, didn't you? Can you link it? I remember it was something along the lines of "How Girls Waste Time". :)
?
What do my comments on this post have to do with materialism?
Actually what I meant was that the girl in question knows what she wants, and she's doing something to put herself on the first step towards her goal. That's the reason why she does what she does.
I don't equate good salaries (depends on the amount)/grades with success either. $5000 may be high for some, but it won't matter a bit when you're in your 80s and have no talents that you can identify with. What happens when the money runs out? Thus, you got to find something that you can do well. Even better if you can leave something in history (after you're gone, obviously).
Like Hitler. Even though he would have exterminated everyone standing in his path if he could have, you got to hand it to that guy to start with nothing and end up taking half the world at his peak. People remember him for that (and the fact that he caused the death of millions(?) of Jews).
But then again, I don't really respect those who can work and still take money from their parents. That speaks of laziness and dependence. To me, that means that you don't have the fire to do something on your own, and control some part of your life.
Oh, and the girl in question is attached. Tough luck for those who may be interested.
I've been waiting, but to no avail, for Zhenz to butt in with an absolutely ridiculous comment. That being said, I'm sure it's only a matter of time.
My un-mediocre girlfriend would like to meet you in person to rebutt your arguments. She would also like to point out that the commentator 'girls' is an absolute disgrace to all womankind.
I, on the other hand, at least agree with your keen observation on girls and their lack of hobbies, as a disturbing sign of a lack of passion. However, "eating" has transcended the sphere of being a mere bodily necessity - to epicureans and foodies, it is a pursuit of gastronomic pleasure that really isn't much different from the thrill of playing a sport or modelling a Strike Noir. In that sense your definition of hobbies might be too narrowly constricted to what men in general perceive it to be. Women, who derive similar, if not greater pleasure from rummaging through countless shelves in Far East in pursuit of the perfect pair of shoes, might see no reason why shopping/eating should not constitute legitimate hobbies.
i agree. women are nothing more than sex toys for us men. other than that, they are useless. this is also why i have a 10 year paid up subscription to fhm. fix her computer and then bed her, that's my advice.
someone: Haha, watch it, you might wind up the next Bryan Ferry.
kwong: Is this the famed face of NUS Law School, commenting on my humble blog? I thought your quote on the advertisement was really, really clever. :) *cough*
Sure we should meet up sometime - I'm really apprehensive now, though.
I'll address your question - "Can eating and shopping be hobbies?" - in my next entry.
sieteocho: Fix her hardware and she'll fix yours, in other words. An interesting point of view. Get back to me in 10 years.
oh my. this is a really interesting read. I was just thinking to myself if I was mediocre.
I am intending to pick up dance classes just for fun, I love bumming in front of the TV, I can't fix my own computer if it messes up, and I can't play sports.
But why would this classify me as mediocre really? Dance classes would be my form of sport/exercise. For TV, apart from the storyline, it can be interesting to discuss how the set came together and was filmed (I can't help it, I did mass comm), I cannot fix my computer but will learn if a guy would teach me while he fixes it, but in the sports department I give up hands down.
But then, I realise I have a lot of males friends who are such as well. So does it mean that a rather large part of Singapore is really mediocre?
How many hobbies does one have to have to qualify as non-mediocre?
Perhaps some simply prefer to have tried as many things as possible while they can, instead of stick to one. Some people never find their passion till they have been there done that - then realise they want to do it over and over.
- Thanks for the nice read. :O) -
While I'm inclined to agree with you that eating and sleeping are mediocre hobbies, much of your judgment is based on your personal opinion on what is and is not important in life. To some, looking good, eating, and sleeping well are the highlights of being human. Fixing computers, playing basketball, or mastering anything else within your realm of competence just doesn't mean anything to them. I could replace the eating and sleeping bits with "watching football", "building toy models", and "replacing light bulbs" to flip your argument over.
If you like a gal who can get real things done, then by all means, do so! However, some men apparently like flower vases and trophy maidens. Maybe they are equivalents of the mediocre gals!
But hey, at least they find their match! God forbid that these men propagate their inferior genes through useful women who kill cockroaches, cook well, and do triple integration as a hobby. How lucky we must be to have mediocre people match up so that we can court the competent gals ourselves!
Whoever tomorrow-ed this entry seriously needs to get a life.
Firstly, it's labelled as 'Dogmatism'. So please at least google that out first before passing it off as chauvinism.
In anycase, it's still rather well written.
And please please please. LOOK AT THE LAST PARAGRAPH FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!
A very intelligent article! And some very good comments up there.
I think this notion that women are the privileged lot stems from the history of male dominance in the work place and the idea that women are the weaker gender. Even all that idea about expecting women to be demure and dependent is just a whole tradition thing that we haven't quite shaken off. I guess it is just a matter of transition, that makes Singapore women seem so mediocre.
Comparing to our grandmothers, we are less competent homemakers and caregivers. How many young Singaporean women can sew and cook decent meals? (In answer to the argument that women and men excel in different areas.) As a matter of fact, few young Singaporean women are that capable in the home, or even actually feel the need to be able to bake her child's birthday cake.
In comparison to more developed and advanced countries where women are given almost equal opportunities in work (and are expected to be equal, if not better, than men at work), our ladies look like day dreaming princesses stuck in their imaginary castle in the air waiting for the gallant, charming and may I add, RICH, prince to rescue them. (Oh all the rubbishy feel-good Korean dramas!)
It's a transition. Let's wait for the Singaporean women to snap out of their dreams that some prince charming will rescue them, and let's wait for the Singapore men to stop hoping for a beautiful, eager-to-please Stepford Wife.
Perhaps then, when cold hard reality starts to hit us in the face, when women are expected to earn their keep and when men start looking up to intelligent women better than them at work, we'll have less mediocre Singapore women, and men.
I suffer from this very difficult confused stage of transition too.
As a female, I'd act absolutely horrified and yell "ungentlemanly!" at the guy who slams the door in my face and in etiquette, pretty much expect that guys stand when they introduce themselves while the girls may remain seated. I scream to the heavens how the feminists and their ridiculous feminism revolution has screwed up the lives of us modern women who have to balance both work and family.
But I am secretly thankful that I am now given the opportunity to education and self-improvement beyond skin deep, which has altogether made me feel like a better person. I approach my male friends for technological help, but google, hunt down parts in Sim Lim Square on my own, fix up the electronics at home. I scoff at male friends who ask me for technological help, but secretly feel happy at my accomplishment. (I'm only a layperson in technology.)
So I'll say, there's hope for Singaporean women. Really. And men too.
May i add? You somehow had lumped girls and women together, firstly.
And I'd like to beg to differ. I think you shld specify it's SINGAPOREAN, HONGKONG, JAPANESE and KOREAN girls (so we've basically covered the main Asian ppl). I am not saying all, so pls don't get agitated. I'm referring them as a general, from those that I observe.
I do not think most of the women abroad are like this. Women (not girls) I'd seen and conversed with abroad, are pretty much intelligent. I perhaps have been blessed with such ppl around me. But these women that I'm referring to (excluding those nationalities as mentioned above), are able to engage in politics, economics and alot more. We have never dabbled into anything like fashion or that sort, not because we don't have but we seriously do not see the need to talk about it. And we fix our own lightbulbs, toilet, and some of the other things as well.
No doubt, I love to sleep and I admit I'd include that as a hobby in my CV, if the societal idiosyncrasies are not imposed on me.
But let's see... According to Dictionary.com, the term 'hobby' is: "an activity or interest pursued for pleasure or relaxation and not as a main occupation".
I sleep more than what some ppl think, (only sometimes) when I'm free because I'd been working long hours. But that's partly because while i'm working and slogging at work, they're either clubbing or sleeping at home. So over the weekend, when I'm dead beat... It's natural for me to sleep a few more hours in the afternoons. That's my hobby, because I derive pleasure out of it.
Well, I'm not standing up for the girls whom you mentioned. So please don't get me wrong. In fact, I'd totally agree with you on most of the Singaporean girls' so-called 'hobbies'. I am utterly disgusted by them. I do not know how most of the ppl see this, but whenever some girls/ Singaporean 'ladies' tell me they do this or that as their hobbies, first question that comes into my mind: do they really mean they're doing it on regular basis? Or saying it to try to impress? And yes, I agree with you.
Most of these girls never seem to grow up. Come on, gimme a break! Why are you still going gaga over some Korean stars or whatever when you're already in your mid-20s or older? I can understand if those old aunties who retire, or never had anything better to do. Hence pursue that as an 'interest'. But while you're still young, why don't you think how you can better contribute to the world? The society?
I think men and women have different driving forces
and yes I agree men can be ego driven
last time I checked, women were supposed to be more sensitive and warm, compared to men's clunky emotions.
I date women
who are self assured, can fend for themselves financially, emotionally
I don't think she needs to fix a computer to prove herself, but I am impressed by a person who knows how to use her hands (be it for operating electronics or for sewing and cooking.)
one does not need to judge oneself by what hobbies one has, and that point in the article is not really necessary to prove your point...
Being competent, intelligent, independent, confident, and having a point of view to me define a woman.
btw, you'll be surprised that surface beauty is NOT such a big deal for men, I hate it when girls blame guys for making them get so concerned about looking good.
so girls...
btw,there are mediocre girls all over the world, and I've met many wonderful women in Singapore (I heart singapore women.)
It is no wonder women nowadays are highly stressed out. Rather, confused.
We are accused of being both a type A woman and a type F (F for Fail) woman at the same time.
On one hand, men complain of abundant overtly-competent women who induce a sense of inferiority in men. On the other, women are labelled wimps who parasites on men's innate desire to protect.
Certainly, Murphy must have been playing a huge trick on men that they just do not seem to be lucky enough to get acquainted with the kind of women they prefer.
Or perhaps, women really are a contradicting lot who never seem to be able to please (amazingly, that seems to be the irrefutable expectation of women).
juz_A_ga|: You're not mediocre, you can play the flute! :)
Don't get me wrong - I'm a jack of all trades, master of none myself. I played college tennis, but I am far from the best. I make model kits, and they please me, but I'm not sure if the modelling community would hold them in the same regard. I play guitar and bass in a band, but we've only had non-paying gigs to date. I have a home recording studio, but the songs I write don't necessarily have mass appeal. I have a level 70 Tauren Druid on WoW, but he doesn't even have one Epic. I write poetry and draw from time to time, and I think the works are decent, but I am more than aware that these things are heavily subjective.
But my point is basically that it's not enough to just dabble and to feel contented that you've "tried" an activity, to pat yourself on the back and list the hobby on your Friendster profile when you've all the competency of a newcomer. If you want to remain a dilettante for life, that is fine, but that is also the very definition of mediocrity. But hey, if you think that's not a big deal, then go ahead; don't let my judgments affect you. My original post never said it was bad to dip your fingers into many pies; just that that sort of conduct would be regarded by some (myself included) as mediocre.
christopher: That was the plan. But now you've let it out. I shall have to kill you.
Anyway - you are right, these are my subjective, dogmatic views. Anyone who thinks I think I'm spouting universal truths here is quite misguided. I very subjectively think that eating and sleeping very, very mediocre hobbies indeed. I'm not saying they are unworthy pursuits - I'm saying that they are perfectly mediocre. Why, even cows like to eat and sleep.
Think about it - would being a janitor qualify as having a "career"? You'd feel odd using that label, wouldn't you? It would be politically correct (the advertisements would certainly use the term), but it would also be highly counter-intuitive. Analogously, eating and sleeping as "hobbies".
mcjonathan: I love you man.
oiying: Yours is probably the best comment so far. Thanks for being honest, balanced and endearingly self-aware. :) I don't really need to say more, since your comment speaks for itself (very articulately, too).
This issue of transition bugs me as well. We always complain about Singaporeans in general being rude and a far cry from the European standard; but like you said, our Western counterparts have had centuries for refinement and development. We have had all the time from 1965. It was tough, and something had to go; and so economic prosperity displaced social grace.
Hopefully the transition period won't last for much longer. Already the youth of today are less curt and brusque; and I felt this even after spending four years overseas in socially developed countries. It can only be a matter of time before the improvements in superficial aspects (politeness etc) reach deeper (the full realization that gender roles should perhaps be rethought).
tinalee: Yes, I was actually thinking about imposing a generational distinction. I'm not familiar with the generation post-30, except that they all seem to be responsible and hardworking (relative to us, not really hard to do I guess). So yes, this should have been restricted to girls and girls only. And even then - may I add for the 9328234234569th time - SOME girls.
Regarding your caveat on the definition of "hobby": please see my reply to Oiying above. I do not think something that everybody (and everything) enjoys (food, sleep, sex) can be *strictly* classified as a hobby. It's semantics, I suppose; to my mind, a hobby is something that you can improve at, that makes you more interesting, that requires a modicum of skill to get good at. If I said my hobby was farting, would you accept that? I really enjoy farting, it's great, it relieves pressure on my stomach. But to call that a hobby? How different really is farting from eating? Or sleeping?
To say that something is your hobby because you derive pleasure out of it is then, to my mind, quite facetious. I really enjoy digging my nose as well. How can that, to any right-thinking member of the public, qualify as a hobby? "Societal idiosyncracies" would surely intervene.
.:
"one does not need to judge oneself by what hobbies one has, and that point in the article is not really necessary to prove your point..."
My point, that SOME girls expect too little from themselves, is unproveable in the abstract. In any case, I don't judge these girls by the *kinds* of hobbies they have; I judge them by the way they conduct themselves in pursuit of these hobbies, in the same way you'd judge someone in the conduct of his job (as opposed to his *type* of job).
"Being competent, intelligent, independent, confident, and having a point of view to me define a woman."
Yes my good man, I never disputed this. This has escalated into your typical gender debate, and I apologize for that.
"btw,there are mediocre girls all over the world, and I've met many wonderful women in Singapore (I heart singapore women.)"
I heart them too. *sigh*
Anonymous: Ah, didn't catch you in time.
Well, that paradox is present for both sides, I guess. Men are also expected to be strong, reliable and stoic, but at the same communicative, sensitive and capable of detecting minute changes in hairstyle.
I honestly think that there are really 4 sexes: strong woman, weak woman, strong man, weak man. But this debate for another time.
How Girls Waste Time
:)
I love it how people always construct straw man arguments, claiming that others are proposing: "All A are B" and that since they can find one A who is not B, the statement is wrong. This is why formal logic is useless in normal life (not that they're thinking in such terms, but still).
http://brainnotinuse.wordpress.com/2007/04/20/on-gender-specific-mediocrity/
I like how this reply to you is totally irrelevant and just goes on a "let's bash the misogynist" roll.
Never let facts get in the way of ideology (or political correctness)!
Hey! no worries! Everyone is entitled to their judgements and I'm glad you clarified that bit about proclaiming stuff as a hobby. Heehee..
(Thanks for reading my blog entry. too. Yes, I know I'm not mediocre. :O) )
heya sze. shoutouts.
time and again im impressed whenever i read stuff from your blog because u can capture the fundamentals pertaining to any issue and manifest it in almost flawless expression, complete with the odd disclaimer like icing on a cake.
and i totally agree with u. it is infuriating dealing with female entities u have identified as mediocre girls who pop out of nowhere, and seemingly everywhere for some reason.
sadly, there are also a lot of mediocre guys who love mediocre girls. a friend of mine finds korean women appealing in that respect - they are submissive, softspoken and know their role in the house, i.e. sit tight and shut up and act dumb. such entities, as u have identified as weak men and weak women, form vicious cycles that result in today's societal mediocrities and shortcomings in our country. but that for another time.
and in validation of ur point that there is no room for male mediocrity as we are all kept in check by one another, i often lambast my 'mediocre' friend (not to be taken in its absolute meaning) for that fallacy.
when faced with a mediocre female entity, my mind is often reduced to pulp and shallow conversations ensue. and it is indeed true that they belong to the class of girls who label extremely substanceless activities as their hobbies, or proclaim activities they have barely dropped an ounce of sweat for as their hobbies. there'd be an outrage in the male world if such an action were to be demonstrated by a guy, unless they are guys who are not guys i suppose (the meaning of which is up to u to perceive, since absolute value counts for nothing nowadays).
granted, i do know of many women of substance out there, and i do help myself (and, hopefully, a progressive society) by choosing to socialise with them instead of mediocre girls, and rather than choosing to bash people who can accurately identify the things that people dont want to be identified and labelled for (precisely because these are shortcomings and sadly, very correctable shortcomings with just a little effort) and attempt to negate the negativity of these mediocre behaviors by escalating things into a comparison war.
three cheers to the ladies, as well as the people, who have passions in life, because with passions come goals, aims and to a certain extent, control of one's destiny. which would naturally make u a more confident and objective person and u'd then go ahead and learn to do the things that u'd otherwise lazily decide to put aside for others to do. that isn't so hard isnt it?
aga: Formal logic is indeed far more powerful in one's own head. I wonder, for those who are uncompromising in their political correctness - do they act on how they feel, or do they act on how they feel they should feel?
juz_A_ga|: So you knew! Fisherman. :)
jose: Yo. This one for next issue then? :P We could use the last paragraph of your comment, I liked it. You expressed my largely negatively-phrased thoughts in a very positive way, thus allowing the problems raised by aga (above) to be circumvented.
I generally agree with your argument that society has perpetuated a stereotype of women and men alike, and also that SOME women have conveniently allowed themselves to be stereotyped just because it is easier.
There's someone here, who mentioned that Sg women are mediocre. I think that's an unfair generalisation, just because you've dated 10 women and got to know another 100 does not count as Sg women. The man who says all Sg women are mediocre is making a sweeping statement which is as bad as any girl saying their hobby is sleeping. Just in case you think "ah! she must be Singaporean!", I'm not :)
Mediocrity exists in both men and women, young and old, Sg or land of supermodels.
what is wrong with liking fashion and make-up? I think you should qualify this. There's nothing wrong with liking fashion if someone wants to be a fashion designer for e.g. or if someone wants to be a make-up artist.
And I think you might be too harsh. People like you might have found what you want to do in our lives, or what you like to do in our spare time, activities that qualify as "not mediocre, not superficial" etc.
but a person who has a passion for tennis plays tennis because it makes him happy playing tennis. If a person is happy doing something (frivolous or not in your position), I think we're in no position to judge. You're already making an underlying assumption that life has to be led in a particular way - that you must have something you are passionate about, that something you're passionate about shouldn't be superficial (which leads us to the question of what qualifies as "real" passions, of the non-bedroom kind.)
Plus, just because I can't fix a bug problem on the computer doesn't make me mediocre if, for example, I could change the lightbulb!! we don't all have to be capable of doing the same things. some people just can't fix a computer problem like some people can't catch a basketball to save their lives. surely there is something you're not good at and you have no wish to try or do or even go near. society is more complex than just... hobbies and a computer technical error.
I think what you call 'mediocre girls' can be subsumed within my conception of a 'simple girl'. You can find many self-proclaimed 'simple girls' on Friendster (Facebook seems to attract a slightly more sophisticated, but since it's opened up to all I have a feeling there'll be a regression back towards the mean).
What's a "simple girl" you ask? The sort which goes for a "sincere guy" (hah!). Do some surfing around.
My impression of "simple" girls:
- Simple-minded
- Not too smart
- Not interested in intellectual topics
- Demure
- Want the guy to take the lead
- Chinese speaking
- From heartland families, usually
- Traditional
- Expect marriage and children, and don't mind being housewives
ie The sort most guys would like.
Eeeeeeeee.
Perhaps I should revise my definition to encompass the dimension of mediocrity, but I don't know how to work that in.
And yes, I do agree - the phenomenon of 'mediocre girls' persists because most guys like them. Ho hum.
This statement about post-modernism can apply to political correctness, since both share a common tenet in this respect:
"For that matter, it is difficult to understand how any kind of action is possible on the epistemological assumptions that postmodernists profess. Not only are their views on knowledge politically disabling, one cannot help wondering how they can conduct the normal business of everyday life without suspending their postmodernist disbelief. Either that, or postmodernist theories are guilty of more than a little bad faith."
BW: Is it fair to say that most or many Singaporean women are mediocre (as he does - NOT that all are)?
If not, how many Singaporean women would he have to meet/know to draw that conclusion?
Just because mediocrity exists in all groups does not mean it is not stronger in some groups than others.
Anonymous: I think mediocre girls can't fix computers OR change lightbulbs. Or for that matter, kill cockroaches.
Someone once observed to me that most Singaporean women can't cook, while most Singaporean men can. I would modify that to say that many Singaporean girls like to bake but can't cook, and many Singaporean men can. So it makes you wonder - where does Singaporean women's comparative advantage lie? Fashion, makeup and sleeping? ><
Perhaps the reason why (Singaporean) women can be and are mediocre is that men are expected to *do* things. Women can just sit around looking pretty.
Life's quite sucky if you are a fat and/or ugly girl.
Goodness, you guys and girls are still talking about this issue. move on. all these opinions are bias, sterotyping and subjective. move on please...
Hee hee. Actually I read this post when it first got Tomorrowed, but I enjoy following the comments. Lol.
I'll just post a totally short and irrelevant comment (partly coz I'm bored and partly coz I want to see what response this will get).
Anyway I think tt it's good to have a good mix of different types of people around, girls and guys both.
Plus, mediocre girls makes it easier for the competent ones to get somewhere and do something, easily.
I'm also of the opinion that following the Darwinist theory, evolution will solve the problem (if any) over time. =)
Lalala.
(not sure if i'll come across OT, i got halfway down the comments page and felt that something needed to be said that so far no one else had really put into writing. if i'm repeating, i apologise)
(Just to add a bit of context, I'm a male)
Thanks, thegreatsze, for the interesting post. While I agree on many of your points, I'd have to add one thing - that there exist today AS MANY "mediocre" males as females.
My opinion is that the mediocrity is a product of Singapore's swift ascent from fledgling nation to economic hub over the last 42 years.
I'd propose that while I can't be sure, in absence of any empirical statistics, whether men or women are more mediocre, I think in general, Singaporeans (ex Pre-65ers) are content not to strive for more than they have to.
And if the mantle of responsibility must be laid on someone, I'd say that it's an unfortunate by-product of the thorough job that the government (PAP and the small segment of otherwise) has done.
In his post, thegreatsze mentioned:
"They do not think: If I drive a car, I should learn about its maintenance and upkeep. If I utilize technology on a daily basis, I should familiarize myself with it above and beyond just consuming. They wail instead: "But why? I have my brother / father / uncle / husband / boyfriend to do it for me." And this wail is final, a comprehensive answer to life's vicissitudes."
But could we not apply the exact same description to Singaporeans in general, with the government taking the place of the brother/ father/ uncle/ husband/ boyfriend?
I think that, politics aside (since we've heard so much about how as youth, we're so apethetic), Singaporeans (again, ex pre-65er) are so used to "someone" planning the path for us, "someone" being there to cushion our falls and "someone" who will help us in our problems, that we've forgotten that this "someone" sometimes needs to be ourselves.
Ok tts my 2 cents and i think i've veered a bit far off :P
On the topic though, my personal view is that guys in general should always have to put in more work. (call it MCP/old fashioned if you will)
There's a place for chivalry in today's society (another subject for another time) and I think chivalry includes not begrudging females the right to choose to be less "able"
Bringing it bac to my original point, I'm a believer of choice and consequence. That is, if one chooses to be less able (or mediocre), regardless of whether the one is male or female, they must be prepared to accept the fact that they will receive less benefit as a result of that choice.
neil: Your points have already been addressed.
Regarding the fact that there exist today as many "mediocre" males as females:
"In any case, there are definitely some very mediocre men out there. No question. But for men, there is an automatic censuring mechanism. Men are laughed at, teased, even jeered when they fall short of the male ideal, when they prove to be mediocre. Look at aga's comment. We are losers if we fail to measure up; our women turn elsewhere.
There is no corollary for the female. If a woman is mediocre, it is accepted as is. Nobody will go up to a woman and say, "Huh? You're 25 years old and you still don't know how to operate the VCR?" It is this difference in expectation that explains my post's slant." (reply to "someone")
Regarding the fact that all this is due to Singapore's swift ascent from fledgling nation to economic hub over the last 42 years:
"I think this notion that women are the privileged lot stems from the history of male dominance in the work place and the idea that women are the weaker gender. Even all that idea about expecting women to be demure and dependent is just a whole tradition thing that we haven't quite shaken off. I guess it is just a matter of transition, that makes Singapore women seem so mediocre.
Comparing to our grandmothers, we are less competent homemakers and caregivers. How many young Singaporean women can sew and cook decent meals? (In answer to the argument that women and men excel in different areas.) As a matter of fact, few young Singaporean women are that capable in the home, or even actually feel the need to be able to bake her child's birthday cake.
In comparison to more developed and advanced countries where women are given almost equal opportunities in work (and are expected to be equal, if not better, than men at work), our ladies look like day dreaming princesses stuck in their imaginary castle in the air waiting for the gallant, charming and may I add, RICH, prince to rescue them. (Oh all the rubbishy feel-good Korean dramas!)
It's a transition. Let's wait for the Singaporean women to snap out of their dreams that some prince charming will rescue them, and let's wait for the Singapore men to stop hoping for a beautiful, eager-to-please Stepford Wife.
Perhaps then, when cold hard reality starts to hit us in the face, when women are expected to earn their keep and when men start looking up to intelligent women better than them at work, we'll have less mediocre Singapore women, and men." (Oiying's comment)
Regarding your point that if one chooses to be less able (or mediocre), regardless of whether the one is male or female, they must be prepared to accept the fact that they will receive less benefit as a result of that choice:
"People who don't want to learn how to better control the things they use so often in their lives will eventually get screwed by their reluctance to improve, regardless if they have breasts or not..." (zu31g's comment)
"zu31g: you think? they just blame those whom they expect to help them. few men are as abrasive, small, self-righteous and confrontational as I am - so no, I don't think they will get screwed over much (let's not read into the innuendo)." (my reply)
I will add to my last reply that in general girls will not receive less benefit if they choose to be less able. In fact, they might well receive more. Competent, able girls do not seem to receive much male attention; men (generally speaking) do not feel as needed and so they turn away. This, of course, is based on my personal availability heuristic; and of course superficial factors are also relevant. So the proper test is whether gorgeous competent receives more attention than gorgeous incompetent. My guess is that most average men would swarm the gorgeous incompetent. There is, at the very least, already an excuse for interaction (the offering of assistance). The courtship of gorgeous competents is a difficult endeavour indeed.
This was quite an interesing point of view, but still quite unfair.
You expect women to be not- "mediocre", but claims that men have it "thrust upon them to communicate well, to get in touch with their feelings...etc". Weren't men socialised into that role as well? Can I say it is expected of men to communicate well and get in touch of their feelings, etc, while women have it thrust upon them to be something else they aren't?
To some women being able to cook is also just another common skill, just as to some men the knowledge of software/hardware and programmes is just another common knowledge.
IMHO, the world is interesting because we have mediocre and not-mediocre women, as well as the classic and mot-so-classic men. No point trying putting everyone through a cookie cutter machine.
"Can I say it is expected of men to communicate well and get in touch of their feelings, etc, while women have it thrust upon them to be something else they aren't?"
No, you cannot. There is a feminist movement which makes it politically incorrect for us to insist that women stay at home to cook and clean. That expectation is no longer one that sees play (and that is a good thing). Is there a men's movement campaigning for men to get in touch with their softer side? Are there men's rights groups seeking to champion the right of men to cry and hug one another emotionally without them being labelled wusses? No. There is not. (Or if there are, they are far, far lower in terms of profile.)
Girls (I do not use 'women' as it has been pointed out to me that it would be unfair to comment about the older generation, who, it seems to me, were far less mediocre than we are) have nothing "thrust" upon them. Most males are over-protective and gallant, unlike small, simpering, cowardly me. When these girls fall short - in technology or conversation or general knowledge or whatever - none of these males really feel that their expectations have been disappointed. If anything, they will be only too happy to swoop in to help and then afterward bask in the afterglow. Which is why I say this is not a misogynistic rant; the men are guilty too. In fact, they are the root of the issue.
An anecdotal point: I have never seen a girl study me industriously as I assist her with a piece of technology (I am excluding GEP girls from RGS when I say this). She will say, "Oh I'm so glad you're here", "I'm a klutz with technology" and a variety of other cute endearing phrases - but they will NOT be actively engaging. They will not be asking questions, learning, finding out more. /End anecdotal point.
"To some women being able to cook is also just another common skill, just as to some men the knowledge of software/hardware and programmes is just another common knowledge."
Cooking is not some exotic female art. Most guys who have done NS can cook. If someone can't cook at -all-, I'd find it hard to respect them, male or female. In the same way, if someone has no idea what a USB port is, they will have little credibility in my eyes - be they male or female.
"IMHO, the world is interesting because we have mediocre and not-mediocre women, as well as the classic and mot-so-classic men. No point trying putting everyone through a cookie cutter machine."
The world is definitely more interesting because there are morons out there. I don't dispute this. But I will be happy to hang out with the not-so-mediocre women and the more enlightened (not-so-classic) men, thank you very much. You are the company you keep.
My take on this is that a portion of these 'mediocre girls' would not have ended up being mediocre if they had had support from their peers.
In pretty much any activity - be it a hobby, or profession - such support is crucial; to excel requires that one gets feedback, constructive criticisms, and places to bounce ideas off. Now, if you're female working in a traditionally male-dominated arena like gaming or engineering, the chances of you getting such support, particularly when you first start, is quite slim. What you're likely to get instead would be sexist remarks, derisive jeers or, at best, silence. Very few will take you seriously. There'll be remarks on how your Gundam matches the skirt you're wearing instead. With a hostile environment like this, is it a surprise that many would give up their pursuits and stick to something 'safer' instead? You literally have to be a bitch to stick to your guns and continue what you love doing; even then, the catcalls and whatnot never completely stop.
Here's an experiment. Try generating an obvious female character, with an obvious female name, on any MMORPG. See how far you can get before the harassment becomes unbearable. BT, DT.
Or another one: observe what happens when a female tries to correct a male, particularly when it comes to tech-related stuff. You're almost never going to see a male admit he's wrong. Rather, the female will be on the receiving end of the "you don't know what you're talking about" look. BT, DT too.
It's too easy to say that males are the problem because they like passive, vapid females, so females naturally act like their stereotype. It's ignoring the other problem - that the reaction of males, whether they are aware of it or not, serve to push females into mediocrity.
-----
Going by a site like Facebook probably isn't representative either. The passionate girls are likely out there pursuing their hobbies rather than updating their Facebooks every five minutes. :D
origamiwolf: I agree with you completely. I guess I didn't see the point in adding the distinction to change "Men are the problem" to "Men's reactions to women are the problem". But you've brought out some very subtle nuances indeed. /clap
I've had female avatars in WoW. But people can always tell that I'm a guy though. Maybe it's because I like to strip naked and run around Orgrimmar yelling "Need 5000 G for epic mount, will let you mount me in return". :D
"Going by a site like Facebook probably isn't representative either. The passionate girls are likely out there pursuing their hobbies rather than updating their Facebooks every five minutes. :D"
You might well be right, but then look at yourself (I know you might well not be a girl, but that really shouldn't make a difference): you do some really awesome origami but you still have time to read - and comment on - the silly websites of people like myself. So, no, not necessarily mutually excluesive.
I loved your Hydra btw. :) Please try to fold a Gundam next. (Something like this or this, maybe.)
Try this for another angle of the same dose of diatribe.
http://lemondroplets.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!26F399664A850E81!531.entry
Well said! The fact of the matter is it APPEARS that the gals want to have more rights etc etc, but when faced with something unenviable they will go back to the defence that they are just gals...etc etc. They want to have their cake and to eat it. The burden has been thrown squarely on the shoulders of the males.
With regards to examples, me thinks you could have put Joan of Arc, though of course her actions are more "guyish" for lack of a better word.
Veron: Male are not the the disucssion. Start a post in your blog and I'll come over to talk about male.
thegreatsze: Yes, Singaporeans are a mediocre in general. If you have mediocre leaders, what do you expect.
Some mediocre people are stuck in the esteem level on the Maslow's hierarchy of needs, receiving PHD he did not read and that was not approved by the Dean of law of the Uni. Should we be seeking self-actualisation instead.
Then again, by making the above statement, I just downgraded to esteem. Sigh!
you don't have to be beautiful. really. (being fat is a different matter altogether, because to the extent that we have normal genes and can control our weight / diet, fatness is a function of how much self-discipline and self-respect we have.)
there's also fat genes. and other factors for being fat. not all fat people are that way due to their lack of self-discipline and self-respect.
you desperately need to shut up before you cross too many people with your narrow-mindedness.
TGS: Actually, NeiL made a great point that wasn't mentioned.
"I think that, politics aside (since we've heard so much about how as youth, we're so apathetic), Singaporeans (again, ex pre-65er) are so used to "someone" planning the path for us, "someone" being there to cushion our falls and "someone" who will help us in our problems, that we've forgotten that this "someone" sometimes needs to be ourselves."
Indeed indeed, I commented on the transition we're facing, but this whole idea of a well-managed and well-regulated Singapore could also be a contributing factor to the mediocre people around, men or women.
At one end, the women (this issue about using 'girls' or 'women' is plain silly to me, women are grown up girls, it has nothing to do with the generation they belong to) need not do anything themselves and just depend on the men in their lives who willingly, gallantly and chauvinistically come to their rescue.
What makes women like that mediocre is their lack of ambition, lack of drive, lack of want to learn and pick up skills for themselves.
Similarly, what I personally experience with Singaporean men is their lack of ambition and drive to do something about their lives. It's always about cramming the books in their heads for good grades at the exams and to get the most stable, well-paying job to waste their lives away. Often, this is related to societal norms about what is most profitable, or maybe what the government wishes to encourage, e.g. biotechnology, entrepreneurship.
We hear underdog stories of successful entrepreneurs and also the government provides support for entrepreneurs. So poof! We suddenly have everyone interested in setting up their own businesses. The arts is not lucrative, so few build a career in it (but many dabble in it, for a "facebook" while).
It is saddening that I seldom meet people who are truly passionate about what they do and have the drive to achieve in their area of interest. We are just too economic savvy. (This may well not be Singapore specific.)
Like NeiL mentioned, perhaps all this has to do with the fantastic planning that the Singapore government has done for the country. Maybe this has made people forgot how to think for themselves.
Maybe we're just too used to having decisions made for us and routes planned for us.
But really, everyone should have the drive to make decisions for themselves. Everyone should bear responsibility for their decisions, boys and girls.
Guess this is not absolutely relevant to the gender specific mediocrity. But also maybe, men are too busy feeding their ego by meeting the mediocre women's trivial requests spend time working on their ambition. This just makes everyone worse off, men or women.
Ned: Thanks man. I appreciate it. :) (Did you have some trouble with comment submission?)
kevin: OK. I did not understand what you were saying - the bit about Maslow and self-actualization. Expound?
anonymous: You are obviously a moron, and a cowardly one at that. You quoted me:
"you don't have to be beautiful. really. (being fat is a different matter altogether, because to the extent that we have normal genes and can control our weight / diet, fatness is a function of how much self-discipline and self-respect we have.)"
and then you go on to say
"there's also fat genes. and other factors for being fat.not all fat people are that way due to their lack of self-discipline and self-respect."
Do you know how to read? Your own post, even? Or are you just a politically correct machine, jumping at the first chance to get offended by anything and everything? Sure must be fun being you.
"you desperately need to shut up before you cross too many people with your narrow-mindedness."
Who? People like you, with no balls and accountability? I'm sorry. Please don't take it personally. It's not your fault that you have no spine - something about the genes, you said?
oiying: I would venture to say that the good planning was necessary for all that we have today. How we go from here is well and truly up to our generation. Certainly we have to move on from what we had at the Q&A for MSU 2007: (not verbatim)
Question: What do you think will be Singapore's first Olympic Gold?
Contestant: Well, whatever the government wants to concentrate our foreign talent in.
thegreatsize,
The problem was related to the computer i was using at that time.
First of all, I really enjoyed the post - thank you for the entertaining read. I also tried following all the comments, but there are many points raised and I apologize in advance for repeating any.
I'm mediocre. I dabble, and I let my cats do the cockroach-killing. I can't say I've a particular direction I'm moving towards - I go with the flow. That said, I'd be pretty indignant if someone said I had no personality and can't hold a semi-intelligent conversation.
Mediocrity is not something anyone strives for. I'd rather believe the phenomenon is a result of social programming (I know this has been brought up). And I feel the need to echo the sentiment that the validating of "passions" and "hobbies" is completely subjective. What's cool and interesting to one could be completely inane to another. There is no benchmark for comparison, and absolutely no reason for anyone to look upon these Mediocre Girls/Simple Girls as cardboard personalities we should feel sorry for (or even herd 'them' as a group to begin with).
Another point I'd like to add, inspired by Aga's link to his own entry, is that age DOES play a large part in the perception of mediocrity. A 16 yr old might be more likely than a 26 yr old of being accused to be mediocre, for several obvious reasons (like peer pressure and lack of identity formation). (Only because I think Aga's list is kinda ridiculous, and I can only imagine teenage schoolgirls to be offenders of most items. No offense to the author. :))
On a slight tangent, I'm curious as to what you, thegreatsze, think of someone like XX. She is undeniably a celebrity, which demonstrates some kind of competence, but most of her (public) pursuits and interests are superficial and terribly mainstream and her only goal in life seems to be becoming a tai-tai. Her fame/infamy aside, would you consider her a mediocre person?
meow: The assessment of hobbies is entirely subjective. But I hope my subsequent post - "My Hobby is Shitting" - will convince you to look beyond the mere rhetoric of "comparing different hobbies is like comparing oranges and apples".
What do I think of XX? I think that as a blogger, she's much better than Dawn Yang. Much. She has a critical mind, and is able to express herself in an original and uncluttered way. (She's turned into a bit of a lifestyle pitch now, however; pity.) I don't know anything about her other hobbies, but she has turned her chief hobby - blogging - into her primary source of income. You have to take your hat off to that.
A well-crafted arguement that was a surprisingly enjoyable read. (I came here on a friend's referral and can't say I was expecting much.) But I strongly disagree. I haven't read all the comments, made it through half (which I thought was a pretty commendable effort) and skimmed the rest, but I think you make a gross over-generalisation here. Sure I know girls whose sole ambition is to be a tai tai and who make no bones about telling everyone just that. But they simply do not represent the majority of women I have met. But if this is true for you then, sadly, perhaps you have been meeting (or attracting) the wrong sorts of females.
You also mention that this is a societal role that has been carved out for women. This isn't entirely true, I (and many of my like-minded female friends) will attest to the fact that we think very little of these sorts of women. I will (embarrassingly) admit that in my younger days, a good girl friend and I use to mutter 'bimbo' under our breaths to each other when we passed such girls in school. That, I reckon, is an appropriate corollary for poseur.
marianne: There is nothing for you to "strongly disagree" about - nowhere in my post or my replies did I say that ALL women/girls are mediocre/bimbotic. I know the type, you know the type - and they aren't *all* girls. Of course not. I made this clear at both the start and end of the post. In any case, my views on generalization can be found here.
I am glad you are an active censor of female mediocrity, however, with your under-the-breath muttering of "bimbo". Perhaps the time has come to take it to the next level - tell these "bimbo" girls off to their face. What, indeed, do you have to lose? If you get through to the bimbo, you would have helped your gender gain one more credible individual; if you fail, then, that's one more bimbo who doesn't like you, but frankly, do you - and should you - give a shit?
Anonymous: I don't think anyone was looking for a lecture on the reasons as to why fat people are fat.
We do accept the fact however that not only are you in reality, obviously (and unfortunately) fat and not beautiful, but your inability to comprehend the gist of this article suggests that you are also slightly simple.
So perhaps you should sit quietly with the bad hand the nature has dealt you and stop making silly comments.
Fair enough, my bad.
It's hard not to make the assumption since you do refer to "the female" on occassion, particularly since gender issues are a pet topic of mine as well.
I applaud your optimism but I highly doubt that calling these girls bimbo to their faces would actually change anything.
But I do like the latest addition to the post, especially: "Our roses have lost their scent, for want of smelling." I was attempting to explain to another Singaporean friend why I would rather stay in Australia (I'm a student here) but couldn't effectively illustrate my point. This caputures it succintly.
aiyoh: aiyoh.
marianne: I wouldn't call it optimism. I don't really know what the result of such efforts might be, but I do think that something should be done, even on a personal level. We shouldn't just accept recidivists as they are.
As for staying in Australia: come back here and fight the good fight lah!
i agree with agooga - the proliferation of your so-defined mediocre girls has a large deal to do with the fact that guys simply prefer mediocre girls..
i know some guys who just ain't happy because their wives earn more than them. it just destroys the "i am man. therefore i stronger" cave man mentality
"The only thing necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke.
I'm a wimp, wimps don't fight good fights.
“A Man should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently and die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
- Robert A. Heinlein
Your post should specifically refer to Singaporean women. Most women in other advanced countries know how to do housework, cook and discuss serious issues yet look pretty. Any independent person, male or female should be able to do these and be proud of it. In Singapore however, female laziness or mediocrity is celebrated.
I know how to change my computer's ram, know what the computer specifications are referring to and troubleshoot software problems.
But I do not know how to cook. What kind of Singaporean woman am I according to your viewpoint? 0.o
P.s: I have several ex-classmates that fit neatly into agogo's definition of "simple girls".
anon1: It seems we are all in agreement then.
marianne: Self-aware weakness is still weakness. But I have this problem too, so ... :)
ray: Heinlein, as I'm sure a certain other reader of my blog would agree, is the bomb. I'm not sure on the implications of his final sentence there though.
anon2: Hmm. I'm not so sure about that. Perhaps my post refers to ... youth in general? Singaporean youth, Western youth - the times have become more forgiving on the whole. So it's a chronological distinction as opposed to a geographical one. But I haven't seen enough of the world quite yet. You might be right.
anon3: It's a sign of the times. You can't cook, but you can fix your PC. Doesn't matter. Activities are gender neutral.
do you think it's because our culture celebrates mediocrity?
our culture celebrates material well-being. other facets of life suffer as a result.
Hello, I was referred by a friend to check out your website, and I have to admit, that though I liked your entry, and know that much of it is true for the 'mediocre' classes, I'm afraid I don't believe enough for me to vote for your entry.
I reckon my disagreement stems from how your factual definition of mediocrity is, almost, the anti-thesis of my social circle.
For starters, I'm the girl whom my friends, both girls and guys, call when they need to troubleshoot. I'm no computer expert, but I make it a point, at least, in dealing with software problems, to exhaust all avenues of searching online to find a solution before approaching someone else - and that someone else is usually my aunt, who owns her own computer shop.
I play basketball, and though I have been out of the game for nearly a year (due to some problems), basketball had, for nearly 8 years, meant training until my body gave way, sleep-talking the sport, and right now, not regretting a single moment when I wake up in the middle of the night to find that I had positioned my arm wrongly as a wrong move would result in a sublaxation or dislocation of my shoulder.
At some point in time, passion has to give way to physical weakness, so I turned mine to poetry and writing. Would you say that promising yourself to write or doodle creatively at least for a few moments a day a superficial notion? I write as gifts for my friends, and dabble in photography when time permits as a side hobby. It's for my own aesthetic pleasures more than anything, but I would not call myself mediocre, rather, it is passion that makes me dive for that camera when I wake up to a sky so blue and devote the better part of the upcoming weak manipulating the photo to see how much I can do with it; it is the same passion that drives me to randomly get off a bus to buy pen and paper to write down that unbelievably emotive line that pops into my head.
My passion for basketball, photography and poetry has not waned over the years, and neither have the passions of my friends. Some who joined science competitions in JC, not as extra credit but to delve properly into the realm of research, have taken it into their lives as their majors and holiday extra credits. Others changed there passion for the sports into studying medicine to help other generations of athletes, or coach to pass on the traditions. I do not know a single one of my girl friends who do not have a passion of their own (be it sports, dance, music, or photography. And by that I mean ruined knees, split nails etc), while on the contrary there are just as many male friends who prefer to drift and 'dabble', as you put it. They take up 6 sessions of tennis, while others assume naturally that an SLR meant a semi-professional photographer, while a point and shoot meant someone with no appreciation of the art. By the same argument, one should say that it is not girls who are mediocre in Singapore, but a certain class of gen-y and gen-x Singaporeans, both boys and girls, who are mediocre.
As for eating as a hobby, I see no mediocrity in it. Roboppy has made an art out of it, detailing tastes and flavors to unbelievable extents. There is nothing usual about finding joy in the little things - in fact it is an art to do so. To learn that you only need a little yellow-centered daisy in a mass of overgrown greenery to make you smile and appreciate life is difficult. Someone I very much respect once said to me, "It is easy to be sad, but hard to stay happy." And if simplicity is joy for others - I'm afraid I cannot agree with you that finding joy in the little things is a mark of mediocrity. One need not reach the extent of broken bones and thousand-dollar hobbies to call it passion.
I really enjoyed reading your blog entry, for it was, as you can see, extremely thought-provoking. But just one last point before I end off this too-long comment. Regarding the molds that society pigeon-holes the genders into, I perceive your point about women fulfilling neither role and men taking on all roles as a form of evening out - if one reads this as a dynamic equilibrium, we would simply come to the conclusion that sometime in future, men and women would fulfill the same role. But that aside, I do not fault individuals for have legitimate expectations from the sexes. It simply an analogy to the situation of "Because my mother does", in other words, it is the society that we are born into that results in this mindsets. After all, we must recall that children of Singaporean women born with a foreign partner in a foreign country were not given immediate citizenship (unlike the children of male Singaporeans born in the same situation) until a few years ago.
If the big picture disallows women to take on an equivalent role, expectations of certain characteristics become a natural progression. But with the evening out of rights between the genders, yes, you might just be laughed at for having the expectations, but as a girl, I can't help but smile when a guy opens the door for me. (Which I may mention, only 2 Singaporeans have ever done that for me. I have learnt to wipe away such expectations a long time ago. (= ) One does enjoy being treated like a princess now and then.
Once again, thanks for sharing, and good luck with the blogging competition. =)
Xiang,
The issues raised in your comment have already been addressed, either in my original entry or in the subsequent discussion. I will annotate your remarks accordingly.
You: "For starters, I'm the girl whom my friends, both girls and guys, call when they need to troubleshoot. I'm no computer expert, but I make it a point, at least, in dealing with software problems, to exhaust all avenues of searching online to find a solution before approaching someone else - and that someone else is usually my aunt, who owns her own computer shop."
There is no mediocrity here. "If you are one of those girls who does for yourself or at least tries in earnest to, then you are not mediocre. I did not write his with you in mind."
You: "I play basketball, and though I have been out of the game for nearly a year (due to some problems), basketball had, for nearly 8 years, meant training until my body gave way, sleep-talking the sport, and right now, not regretting a single moment when I wake up in the middle of the night to find that I had positioned my arm wrongly as a wrong move would result in a sublaxation or dislocation of my shoulder."
There is no mediocrity here either. You loved basketball, trained for it, and I presume were competent at it.
You: "At some point in time, passion has to give way to physical weakness, so I turned mine to poetry and writing. Would you say that promising yourself to write or doodle creatively at least for a few moments a day a superficial notion?"
No, I would not say that. I believe I treasure poetry and writing as much as you do. As you can see from this and other entries on my blog, I take pride in what I write. It would be hypocritical of me to belittle good writing and/or poetry. Again, we are in agreement.
You: "I do not know a single one of my girl friends who do not have a passion of their own (be it sports, dance, music, or photography. And by that I mean ruined knees, split nails etc), while on the contrary there are just as many male friends who prefer to drift and 'dabble', as you put it. They take up 6 sessions of tennis, while others assume naturally that an SLR meant a semi-professional photographer, while a point and shoot meant someone with no appreciation of the art. By the same argument, one should say that it is not girls who are mediocre in Singapore, but a certain class of gen-y and gen-x Singaporeans, both boys and girls, who are mediocre."
Here we perceive your fundamental misunderstanding of my post. You appear to think that I see ALL girls as mediocre. This is a straw-man argument, and is patently untrue.
As Agagooga said above:
"I love it how people always construct straw man arguments, claiming that others are proposing: "All A are B" and that since they can find one A who is not B, the statement is wrong."
I am not proposing that "All A are B". I specifically said that "I know SOME girls who think that the only way to troubleshoot their computer problems ...", "as for the mediocre female" (not "as for ALL females") and (again) "If you are one of those girls who has a hobby, who lives for something that you can call your own, if you are one of those girls who does for yourself or at least tries in earnest to, then you are not mediocre. I did not write this with you in mind."
There were places where I did not add qualifier after qualifier, because I felt that doing so would've interrupted the flow of the article. Suffice it to say it should be clear by now that I had no intention of constructing a straw-man, obviously defeasible argument. Not all girls are mediocre, as your own existence attests. Nobody with a logical mind can say "All girls are mediocre" and expect to be taken seriously.
You: "As for eating as a hobby, I see no mediocrity in it. Roboppy has made an art out of it, detailing tastes and flavors to unbelievable extents."
Yes, and so has Jeffrey Steingarten. There is no mediocrity here at all; or, at least, only in a relativistic sense. (Please see my other entry, "My Hobby is Shitting", for elaboration on this point.)
You: "I'm afraid I cannot agree with you that finding joy in the little things is a mark of mediocrity."
Please see "My Hobby is Shitting" for a direct response to this. If we are only disagreeing upon the definition of "mediocrity", then we are not really in disagreement; we are just unsettled over the semantics. What we value is the same.
You: "But that aside, I do not fault individuals for have legitimate expectations from the sexes ... but as a girl, I can't help but smile when a guy opens the door for me."
This is all well and fine, but then you must not protest when the legitimate (and if I may be so bold, sexist) expectations are foisted upon yourself, e.g. when a man expects his wife to cook and clean as he smokes his pipe. If you *do* see the banality in that expectation, then perhaps you should re-examine your position and its concomitant internal inconsistencies.
In any case, thank you for the well wishes, and thank you even more for reading the whole post. I'll get over not having your vote. :)
Hello, I think we've both got some misconception of each of our writings. Just a couple of replies.
Here we perceive your fundamental misunderstanding of my post. You appear to think that I see ALL girls as mediocre. This is a straw-man argument, and is patently untrue.
I'm afraid I did not perceive your view as all girls are mediocre, as per your final qualifier in the last paragraph. I came to the conclusion, that it is a "class" of people who are mediocre, not a class within a particular sex. Perhaps it can be seen as a widening and modification of your own view?
This is all well and fine, but then you must not protest when the legitimate (and if I may be so bold, sexist) expectations are foisted upon yourself, e.g. when a man expects his wife to cook and clean as he smokes his pipe. If you *do* see the banality in that expectation, then perhaps you should re-examine your position and its concomitant internal inconsistencies.
I actually find an inclusive view consistent, as my point of view is the changing status of men and women - yes, the comment is sexist, but not untrue. Now a man may expect his wife to cook and clean as he smokes his pipe, but his wife surely would expect him to do his share of the dishes after dinner and help mop the house on the weekends. By the same argument, the man would expect to see his wife after 5pm each day, for the modern woman would have as much of a chance of be out working as he is. Expectations, sexist as you prefer to call, are still existent whether we treat them as archaic or not, but there is the tempering of these expectations. Just as per my expectations of having the door opened for me, I've learnt that such expectations must be lowered as the perceptions of men have of women changed with the times. In addition, one has to accept the position that the people around her put her in, and learn to work around it and get to the goal in the end still - hence, I do not think that my view is inconsistent. Seeing the banality of an expectation does not mean that one cannot embellish it to suit the times and individuals.
I'll get over not having your vote. - You understand then. =) This has been a really, really interesting discussion. =)
well done =)
i hope for more of the same high standard of writing here.
that you provoked so much comments speaks volumes about your ability to write well.
xiang: You state that your argument is a "modification" of my view, and that you did not think that it was my assertion that "all girls are mediocre". But the examples you cite in your comment are all of them examples of non-mediocre females. What, then, are you trying to achieve with these examples, if not to refute the straw-man argument that "all females are mediocre"?
And, given this, what exactly is your "modification"?
Your last paragraph proves the most confusing.
You said: " ... but as a girl, I can't help but smile when a guy opens the door for me."
I said in response: "This is all well and fine, but then you must not protest when the legitimate (and if I may be so bold, sexist) expectations are foisted upon yourself, e.g. when a man expects his wife to cook and clean as he smokes his pipe. If you *do* see the banality in that expectation, then perhaps you should re-examine your position and its concomitant internal inconsistencies."
You said in return: "Expectations, sexist as you prefer to call, are still existent whether we treat them as archaic or not, but there is the tempering of these expectations ... Seeing the banality of an expectation does not mean that one cannot embellish it to suit the times and individuals."
So what you are saying is: Let's keep the door-opening expectation, but lose the women cook-and-clean expectation? Let's have men pay, but women earn too? Where do you draw the line then? And how is your view coherent? How would you express it in a cogent argument or summary of your position?
albert o ii: Thank you for your compliments, they are much appreciated. I should point out, however, that it is sensationalist writing, not good, that draws the readers.
somehow, all I thought was: lvl 70 and no epics?? omg N00BZ!! ;)
(fair enough though; there's more to life than WoW...)
I get your point, THEGREATsze. Just that I felt they are not strongly backed up with the right examples and proof. By using all those trivial stuff about what hobbies these people in friendster wrote, how sucky they are in their hobbies does not justify "female mediocrity" very strongly. The only point it bring across is that you're a very shallow, judgmental and opinionated prude who sees things on the surface. It also shows how self-centered, and how superior you think of yourself, backed by even shallower attributes . You fired all your shots, albeit, not on the target but on the sidelines. Good try though
anonymous: I got Taran Icebreaker ok. Don't mess with me.
kaori: You did not get my point. There is no contradiction between encouraging people who try in earnest and scrutinizing laurel-resters who name-drop a few barely-started "hobbies".
As for your point on the definition of the word "hobby", I have written an entire post on the subject (see the post following this one). If you can be bothered to read it (a point which I do not take for granted), you will find that it addresses many of the issues you raise.
(this comment was edited on 29/05/07 - a case of mistaken identity previously)
I'm a bit late in giving a comment but better late than never. Firstly, I despised you from the moment I started reading the 1st paragraph of your competition entry. I labelled you as an extreme chauvinist. Then after the 2nd paragraph, I couldn't take it and closed your blog.
But I decided to come back to read the whole entry after some time, and realised that you did highlight some good points that made sense. However, at the end of the reading, I still find you an extreme chauvinist. Wahaha!
I'm glad my male friends don't think like you. Nothing personal. *shrugs*
But of course. The obliviousness of the male is precisely what the female likes so much about him; who wants to be attached to a female in male clothing? (Generally speaking.)
Your essay (haha, it's funny how I said essay, and not post, as this was an entry for a blog competition, which is how I found your blog) was valid, but slightly too offensive. It's true that there are many "mediocre" females like that, but surely not enough to justify being hastily generalized into the all-encompassing label of "girls".
Also, the accusatory tone makes your post less persuasive, and invites arguments (too many for me to read, so I'm not sure if all this has been said before!) but I guess that's the point of blogs :D
Hrmm have you ever thought that maybe its because females are genetically programmed to be mediocre? And mediocrity is a yardstick that is invented by the male species to measure the female species? If you were to create a world where females are (by your definition) not mediocre, most probably the world will end sooner or later. Do not break something that is most probably an evolved trait. Girls are mediocre for a reason, and it is not bad if it serves a purpose!!!
Our elders worked hard to push through the Women's Charter. They worked to elevate women to equal status with men.
I wonder how they'd feel now that we're are actively encouraging women to be incompetent and unworthy of respect. This encouragement of female mediocrity only degrades women who see nothing wrong with being worthless. It leaves them vulnerable to men's caprices. It also degrades the society that treats them with such contempt.
If this keeps up, I'm afraid we'll waste the efforts of generations.
wilson tennis rackets furnished by wilson- tennisrackets .com include the quite most up-to-date and quite a few .common Furthermore shocked, were 100% guniue wilson blx, that make anyone greater dis.comfort to the excellent experience Ofcourse wilson rackets have additional savings through your think about as opposed to keep Wilson Rackets will certainly satisefy anyone using affordable wilson playing golf rackets using excellent, wilson playing golf rackets users are generally outside of 8, 000 On a daily basis we've got 100 order placed to handle
wilson tennis rackets furnished by wilson- tennisrackets .com include the quite most up-to-date and quite a few .common Furthermore shocked, were 100% guniue wilson blx, that make anyone greater dis.comfort to the excellent experience Ofcourse wilson rackets have additional savings through your think about as opposed to keep Wilson Rackets will certainly satisefy anyone using affordable wilson playing golf rackets using excellent, wilson playing golf rackets users are generally outside of 8, 000 On a daily basis we've got 100 order placed to handle
men and ego,hahaha!
men and ego,hahaha!
ash.
What about the legions of 'mediocre' boys? Those whose only interests are smoking/drinking/stoning at void decks/whatever. Not that I don't think those are perfectly valid interests (hey who is anyone to judge) but the bottomline is stupid people are stupid people, and useless people are useless people if you have to discuss it that way. While you do try to be fair by pointing out that obviously you don't mean ALL girls (just MOST), there are quite a number of mostly annoying assumptions made here about how a typical girl supposedly behaves.
Personally I know a lot more independent and highly-motivated girls/women than mediocre ones, but then no one's personal social circle should be accepted as a valid basis to generalize the wider population... right? :/
interesting exposition, but i think you oversimplify the crux of the issue at hand. this problem is not endemic. it is prevalent in global modern society. this problem stems from a larger 'problem', that of human nature. now, i am not simply disregarding your argument that humans should change, but merely that there are a multitude of factors that your short post has not taken into consideration. this issue can be broken down and analyzed piece by piece, over and over again, but many academics in varying fields. the fact that there is as yet no simple solution to this anthropological problem, if you want to call it that, is testament to the magnitude of the issues you are dealing with. i am not saying there never will be, but that there is as of yet, none, and your flippant encouragement of a code of behavior that (you alone, mind you) happen to believe is right, does not justify its execution.
another aspect of your opinion that i would like to highlight is your unique position relative to your opinion. evidently, by the way you write, one may infer a highly educated and confident (and arguably 'not mediocre') man, whose confidence no doubt stems from his academic success alone. a simple google search confirms this conjecture. now, a smart guy like you should be able to see where i am going with this. you are in a select, elite, privileged group, or at least in my opinion, a somewhat perilous delusional bubble (though some may call it an ivory tower, but to each his own). you have not taken into consideration how you got to where you are, why you did, and your relative position to everyone else, and the very SIGNIFICANCE of that. perhaps a little more introspection is required on your behalf.
cheers.
Sze,
With respect, I think your post reeks of a very dangerous misogyny.
First, your conclusions are drawn from what I presume to be your own circle of acquaintances, which you can scarcely consider be representative of any stratum of society. And yet the language of "Society" allowing "The Female" to stagnate in mediocrity implies a generalization. If you were merely discussing a narrow minority of women whose lifestyles you happen to consider shallow then stop using language to pretend as if there is something socially endemic about "mediocrity". You are spitting on all the Singaporean women who lead active, meaningful, and socially engaged lives, no matter what your caveats to the contrary say.
Second, you act as if only women "have superficial interests". What about all the men who buy wines or books or music they don't really understand because they think it's fashionable? I can agree with you that it is a problem if people have transient and hypocritical interests. But please let us not be patronizing and turn this into a uniquely female quality. That is rank sexism.
Third, you claim that all your male friends have substantial interests, but that females can boast only of "makeup and fashion". For one, this is a profoundly demeaning stereotype of women. But further, who gave you the right to define what constituted a substantial and meaningful interest? What makes being a gym rat any less superficial than an interest in fashion? What makes playing Minecraft 13 hours a day any less mediocre and stupid a habit than learning to dress up? If you are truly interested in removing expectation traps then you start by learning to respect whatever interests people have, not by caging them into judgments of what is useful and what is superficial, and certainly not by assessing people on grounds of what is gender-appropriate or otherwise.
Post a Comment