Thoughtful Thursday: Dating

I have been using Internet dating sites on and off for a while now. Aside from the creeps that you'll probably find anywhere anyhow, they are actually fun. At the least you'll meet interesting people and if you're lucky (and believe me finding a partner is mostly based on luck whether you use the internet or not) you'll find your soulmate. I actually know a couple of people who have found their special someone that way. Anyway, I figure that way I'll at least get someone who'll go to a museum or on a sunday walk through the park with me. 

So, lately I have been thinking about how men and women interact on these dating sites. Actually, the thoughts were triggered by a remark my friend D. made the other day. She somewhat offhandedly was talking about how it was the man's job to approach you. As a female all you had to do was put your profile online and wait ("Come into my parlour," said the spider to the fly...) and to be honest that's what I do. Because it works. And because it's very convenient for me. All I have to do is read the messages from men who are interested in me, based on my profile infos, and decide whether or not I want to answer. I do look at the profiles of men online but I have so far never approached one by writing him a message. Most women I know who have been using Internet dating sites do it like that, too.
After realizing this I sat back and wondered why that is. And then I remembered something I've read on figleaf's blog (in case you wondered, yes, I'm a big fan ;-) ). He calls it the two rules of desire:

1. It is simultaneously inconceivable and intolerable for a woman to have sexual desire.
2. It is simultaneously inconceivable and intolerable for a man to be sexually desired.   (he said it here)

I think these two rules pretty much describe the underlying reasons why I (and apparently a lot of other women, too) approach (Internet) dating so passively. I feel uncomfortable approaching a man online (and offline for that matter) because I fear being seen as too pushy or needy or aggressive. And because  I have this vague notion that in order to attract a man I have to let him be the pursuer. That I will appear less interesting  if I'm too "easy" to obtain.  It's kind of as if I'm the prize in the game that we're playing and the more effort he has to put into obtaining the prize the more valuable the prize will be. And if the prize just falls into his hands (i.e. me approaching him) it's not so desirable.

Sarah on Feministe put it this way:

"One of the things that bothers me especially is the “He’s just not that into you” framing for women, particularly heterosexual women: we are supposed to worry about whether we are desirable, not what we want. The “No means no” model works the same way: we are consenting to something, not desiring it. The “she wanted it” rape excuse: our wants are not our own to define." (find the whole text here) 

In another post on her personal blog she puts it in a wider perspective:

"Sexual desire isn’t the only thing that women have been limited on. We’re expected to be restrained about food, about power, about love, about friendships, about everything. Even I worry constantly that I’ve crossed a line, that I’m bothering someone if I call too much or email too much, and I think that stems from the same place: feeling that I’ve made the fact that I want something too clear, too obvious." (the whole post is here)

 I have pretty much managed to overcome my conditioning on being restrained when it comes to food. I eat what I like, when I like it and how much I like. I'm can even (most of the time) ignore the appalled, indignant, abusive etc. reactions my love for food (and my more-than-mainstream figure) sometimes engenders. So maybe it is time that I overcome some of my other restraints. Maybe it is time for me to approach men instead of waiting to be approached. We'll see.

Have a happy and thoughtful Thursday.

Tasteful Tuesday

Men's clothes are sold much more easily than woman's clothes. That's my conclusion after spending Sunday trying to sell my stuff at the fleamarket. 

We (that's my flatmate and friend D. and I) had a bunch of stuff, mostly clothes, that we wanted to give into the loving care of new owners ("getting rid of" sounds way to harsh in my opinion), so we teamed up with our friends R. and T. and rented a stall at the monthly fleamarket here in Neukölln. Our success at selling was mixed. After deducting the costs of the stall and the car we rented to get the stuff there, D. and I made a profit of 8€. R. and T. made much, much more. And that's where we get to my initial statement: While D. and I had only women's clothes to sell (not surprising with both of us being female), T. and R. sold a lot more because (being a heterosexual couple) they were selling both male and female clothes (and mostly sold the guys stuff). I think that's because women are pickier than men and women's fashion changes a lot more than men's fashion. 

My dilemma is that I can really understand those women who rejected my clothes, even though they were really cheap. I mean, part of the reason why I have so much stuff to sell is that I'm prone to make those spontaneous purchases, you know the one's where you think: "Heck, why not, after all it's really cheap" even though you don't really need it and/or you're not sure about the color and/or fit. On the other hand, some of the stuff I'm selling is stuff I really like. The only reason I'm giving it away is because it does not fit (usually belonging into the category of purchases under the headline "One day I'll fit into it".  Or not.) Rejection of these things really hurts. Really. 

Another thing I noticed, is that it is mostly thin women who stop and look at the things. The sturdier ones, the ones that actually fit into my clothes mostly did not. I'm wondering if that is because they expect not to find anything anyways? Could be. After all why should shopping for clothes at a fleamarket be less frustrating than shopping at a store. From time to time when another girl with a wonderfully curvy body like mine passed the stall I had the urge to shout: "Come here, you beautiful plump goddess. I have clothes that'll fit!" I did not. Possibly because while being comfortable within my own body, I'm still not always comfortable drawing attention to it and can vividly remember the times when I would be mortally embarrassed if someone mentioned my not-so-mainstream figure.
My résumé of the day is, that while it was great fun (the weather was gorgeous, watching the people canvassing the stands is fun in itself and I'm proud to say that I managed to drive the transporter without incident) it's unlikely that I'll repeat the experience in the near future. What is left of my clothes (about 3/4 of what I originally put aside to sell) will be taken to a clothes swap party with friends in 2 weeks and what is left after that I'll take to the clothes drive of our church.
Happy Tuesday!

Scrumptious Sunday: Deliciousness Past

I was busy today. Too busy to bake or cook. My flatmate D and I had a stall at the Nowkoelln Flowmarket to sell our stuff (more on that tomorrow).
But to keep your tastebuds tingling I have some pictures of Sunday Deliciousness Past:

Cheesecake!

Happy Sunday!

Fab Friday

It's finally Friday. Time for my Fab Four. This time it's four videos I recently saw on youtube that I found fabulous:

In view of my debate on equality:

Thoughtful Thursday: to be equal or not to be equal? that is the question...

My friend Ableponder yesterday posted a link to this interesting article. It's an article about the reality of French women who while having a lot of public help in the form of childcare, pre-natal care and tax breaks for families but still earn less than men, have to shoulder the far bigger part of domestic work and whose chances for advancement into the higher echelons of public service or a career are still far below those of her male partners. After reading it I thought the article was well put together but nothing new. By far more ineresting was what my friend made of it:

"Not unsympathetic-- what mama would be? But as an econ major, one thing strikes me... if you have two workers, one of whom is going to take several years off from work, miss more days, etc, you are likely going to protect yourself against the anticipated costs by paying her less." (she said it here)

The thing that strikes me as interesting is that her reaction to the article is so different from mine. My first thought was: What a crying shame! After these many years of laboring for equality we're still restricted by our wombs.
The status quo as described in the article bothers me on several accounts:

1. While on a cursory glance one might think that through free childcare and other (monetary) benefits French mothers have more choices when it comes to motherhood and/or a career. But on a closer look it seems to me the opposite is true. There seems to be more pressure on women to be "productive" in the workplace as well as in the breeding process. Women who try to elude this mandate by either deiciding not to have children or by deciding not to enter a "paid" job in favor of taking care of their children apparently face great social pressure if not ostracism.
2. Earning 26% less than a man in the same job is not fair. No matter how you turn it. First of all, this applies to all women, regardless of their choice whether to have children or not. Basing the reality of less earnings on the abstract possibility that a woman may or may not have children is not equality. Second, it is not a woman's fault that she is the one who has a womb and not her male partner. Human reproduction is beyond our control in that matter, so a couple's choice (there are always two involved in this, you know) should not impact either one's wages just because they cannot choose which one of them is going to give birth. Of course once the child is born and the initial phase of necessary care by the mother is over, men could (and in some cases do) take over the task of caring for their offspring, But the fact that so few do, has in my opinion a lot to do with the fact, that the man is way more likely to have the higher income and therefore it makes (financially) more sense for him to be the provider instead of the caregiver. (and of course the fact that our society is still not mature enough to look upon a father who chooses to stay home with respect, he instead generally faces a lot of ridicule)
3. (Unpaid) Domestic work is work, too. There are studies estimating the value of this unpaid domestic work and it is a significant amount of a country's GOP. The fact the most of that work is still provided by women, and that they get neither recognition nor benefits for their work is quite frankly sad. 

So, what conclusion do I draw from this? I think this is not so much an economic problem but a social one (but then again I'm not an economics major but a humanities one). As long as we still consider women as the primary caregivers, as long as we do not recognize domestic work as valuable and as long as we do not give fathers an equal opportunity at caregiving we will be in this quandary. I think women should have the choice whether or not to become mothers (and by the by I think it is perfectly legitimate to decide to remain childfree, IMO it does not decrease your womanhood or make you less grown-up and whatever rubbish I've heard spouted on that subject). And their coice should be free from social and financial pressure. Likewise should be the choice on whether or not you choose to work or stay at home (and do your work there). And if you choose to stay home it should be free of pressure which partner chooses to do so.

I found an interesting take on this on figleaf's blog:

"The best thing from my perspective would be that since women who have children still spend some time out of the workforce (in my experience three months for the rarely mentioned “fourth trimester” isn’t unreasonable) and therefore put some fraction of their earnings potential on hold (at least till we get solid progressive family leave policies) then it makes sense that women ought to at least start out with higher incomes. (It makes sense that their partners would also support that.)
The advantages are considerable: there’s be no particular intra-family earnings imbalance due to children, there’s be no strong incentive for the partner who stayed at home with the first child to stay at home with the next, etc. And if the family did decide to go the “traditional” avenue where the woman stays home with succeeding children she’d still have an easier path towards reaching income parity when she chooses to return to the workforce.
Yeah, it doesn’t have to be that way As we see in parts of Scandinavia for instance a really strong public/private/family network can be pretty powerful. But at least for now it is that way. And so a trend towards women earning more, at least initially, at least in theory, ought to support more egalitarian — and therefore stronger — long-term relationships." (he said it here)

Hmmm,  giving women higher earnings to start with so that they can buffer those times when their earnings will be less due to maternity...maybe not a bad idea.

As an aside: So French women now produce more kids than German women do. Is there any point in it now? Or do they realize that somehow the basis for this race has shifted? Just curious.

One more thing, does anyone other than me find it disturbing that the reason French women get so much Pre-Natal care is to be attractive to men again and to reproduce? And not because of their health?


Happy Thursday and hopefully this will be seen as some food for thought. As usual, let me know, what you're thinking.

WTF Wednesday: Worldwide decline in violence?

I have recently read an interview with an American psychologist who claims that we are living in the least violent times in human history (and I've mentioned it on eufrika.org*). WTF? Really? Can this be true? I knew about statistics in Europe and the US that state violence there is at its alltime low. But worldwide? How come this is so hard to believe for me. After all, I readily accept that it is true for Europe and America. Why can it not be true for the rest of the world, too, when I so readily believe it for its "Western" part. Is it because the news are full of violence? But then again, they are full of violence happening all over the world. Still, when it comes to reports of violence here in Europe and even in the States I know that I should take it all with a grain of salt, that after all violence sells more papers (and ads) than "good" news do. That, while every instance of violence is tragic and disturbing in and by itself, I still know that relatively viewed these are instances and in no way a general trend. That I am living in a generally peaceful and safe environment. That there is no need for me to go to any extra length to protect me from a perceived threat (the everyday common protection of a single woman aside, but that is subject for another post).
But when it comes to Africa, for example, the declaration that today there is less violence then say 50 years ago or even a decade ago, makes me stumble. ( I chose Africa as my example because a) I am an African Studies minor and being interested in everything that has to do with that continent, I follow the news about it more closely than those about other parts of the world and b) frankly, that's what we all do, isn't it? Equating Africa with violence, at least partly.) So, am I guilty of falling into the same trap that I so valiantly try to avoid, believing in a stereotypical view that I've been trying to dispel for years? If so, well let it serve as a reminder to me, that I cannot sit back and pat myself on the shoulder for being oh so open minded. That it is necessary to every once in a while to take stock of one's beliefs and perception and to ask oneself, is this still true and/or was it ever true. And sometimes this can reveal quite startling things about yourself.
And while I am adjusting my perceptions, it is always good to ask myself, what does this mean to me now. In the instance of the fact, that life in Africa is less violent than it has ever been, what consequences does this have for my perception (and that of other people) of Africa? Does it take away from the horror that war wrecks on the human beings involved in it? Does it diminish the fact that there are heinous violent acts perpetrated on human beings (and not only in Africa)? Does it change my conviction that, as human beings, these acts of violence concern us all? That we all need to offer our help and compassion whenever and however we can? No, of course not.
What this does, is that it changes my perception of myself. That I need to look into myself and ask myself why I so readily accept the belief that life in Africa is necessarily more violent and that violence there has not diminished as it has in other places. And to wonder if this is not based on a lack of respect and a manifestation of the patronizing view on Africa that I have on occasion lamented in others. Let this serve as a lesson for me, that we are all not free from prejudice and in order to achieve true equality for all human beings we need to confront our own prejudices first and foremost.
As always, I'd love to hear what you think!

*Sorry guys it's in German, but those of you who are capable to read German, you're welcome to read my articles and notices I post there (as usual comments are also more than welcome!!!!!).

Meh...Monday: Golden October

The weather forecast was wrong. Instead of dissolving in the early afternoon and making way for sunshine, this morning's fog turned into grey skies and a dismal, cold and dank day. Meh! 


This morning, when I first woke up, the sun was slowly being replaced by this fall's first fog. The world was covered in rising ghostlike vapors, the Fernsehturm (television tower) slowly disappeared from view, sounds were muted, the street below suddenly turned into a gothic wonderland. It could have been everywhere. The Streets of Victorian London with Jack the Ripper lurking just around the corner? Or the canals of Venezia with gondolas soundlessly gliding along?
The possibilities are endless. Now that they have been replaced by dismal reality I can only wait and see what tomorrow morning brings, always hoping that the new day will bring new, exciting possibilities.


In the meantime, enjoy the view from my window on our street on Sunday's beautiful golden october day.

and again for those of you (girls) who need a more inspiring vie on mondays: Look here.


Happy Monday!