Monday, February 8, 2010

Girls Don't Like Boys...Girls Like Cars and Money

First of all, read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/fashion/07campus.html?em

While I am not one to bitch and complain about being single, and quite the opposite often find my romantic situation amusing (I have been known to joke with my friends that they will be so old at my wedding that they will need to use one of those scooters from the scooter store to "walk" as a bridesmaid down the aisle), this article still struck a chord with some observations and grievances I had with college. Statements I agree with in this article (even if I don't really buy the whole numbers argument in general) are as follows:
  1. "My parents think there is something wrong with me because I don’t have a boyfriend, and I don’t hang out with a lot of guys. This girl has the right idea. OK, so my mom has never said that there is something wrong with me. But, because I can count my guy friends from college on a hand (Yes, just one hand), and the number of girls I am friends with is exponentially greater, I have gotten the whole...but "where are the guys?!" and "do you just not WANT to date?" argument. My usual response involves a roll of the eyes, a tad bit of resentment for the days when people got "pinned", and then the ultimate conclusion..."oh them? They suck".
  2. “Out of that 40 percent, there are maybe 20 percent that we would consider, and out of those 20, 10 have girlfriends, so all the girls are fighting over that other 10 percent". True Story. Girls, and I am definitely one to admit this, have HIGH standards. But, typically standards are not so high that no boy fits them. This article neglects boys actions in the matter (just looking at sheer number ratios) and fails to ask why we are not considering them in the first place?! Images of drunken frat boys and "THAT GUY" come to mind. CREEPERS.
  3. "It puts guys in the position to "play the field". OK, so even though I blame slutty girls, expectations, and the fact that most guys do not want to get serious in college for this, the statement about guys being able to play the field is definitely true. The phrase "Why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free" is very relevant here.
  4. "Girls feel pressured to do more than they’re comfortable with, to lock it down" and "Competing for men on men’s terms...results in more casual hook-up encounters that do not end up leading to more serious romantic relationships" I agree with the pressure and the lack of serious relationships, except for the girls who actually want to do that much, the girls who think it is fun to do that much, or the Samantha Jones of us all. But, all of this just perpetuates the cycle. If you are a girl who says no, and a guy can easily find someone else who will do it...well, where does that leave you?! Unfortunately often the answer is... probably alone....at least until you find one of the normal ones who in the words of Colin Firth in Bridget Jones "likes you, just as you are". Oh yes, Granny Panties and all.
  5. "She can only hope the odds improve when she graduates and moves to New York." Oh, the glorious dreams of a better future dating scene (which for a boarding school kid like me have now gone on for two stages of my life). Here's to hoping the next one's better, or maybe that everyone is right and I will marry the first truly serious relationship I have.
  6. "It causes girls to over analyze everything — text messages, sideways glances, conversations...Girls will sit there with their friends for 15 minutes trying to figure out what punctuation to use in a text message." Let's be serious...Who doesn't do this...and who wouldn't do this if there were 100,000 boys all texting you?! It is human nature in girl-world to over analyze (especially if you like the person). Sorry boys...I think this is a character trait and has nothing to do with numbers. It started in middle school when we would write notes about it to our friend (in some sickly cool shaped and folded letter), and it was all down hill from there.
As I am not really a feminist, you won't see me arguing about and hating on this article like most of the thousands of commenters online. In fact, I do think college should be an opportunity to meet men if that is what you want, or if that is what happens, but that being said, there are other things I have a large problem with in this article. Come to think of it, I am not really sure how it was published in the New York FREAKING Times. Things I dislike/disagree with:
  1. I really don't buy the argument that it is simply a numbers and ratios game. I think it is more of a cultural problem surrounding expectations and I wish this article dove more into that level of understanding
  2. They only really talk about UNC. I think the descriptions and conclusions would have been a lot more significant or seem a lot more relevant if they had evidence that this occurred EVERYWHERE. You know...some actual reporting. Otherwise people can play the whole: "not my college" card, and that is LAME. There was a facebook group about resurrecting the "ancient art of dating"...so I am pretty sure that this is a universal issue.
  3. The night described in the introduction where the girls were "trading jokes and belting out lyrics to Taylor Swift" sounds INSANELY FUN. I would not trade nights like those with my friends for well...anything. If that makes me a loser so be it.
  4. "The Ivy league schools are largely equal in gender, and some still tilt male." If you are going to include the group of schools I went to in this story as an implied counter-example...you should probably visit the school and talk to the students. ESPECIALLY when you are WRONG. Ivys are no better with this problem than other campuses, and the equal ratios only further prove the issue is not about numbers.
  5. "It is often the women who must assert themselves romantically or be left alone on Valentine's Day , staring down a George Clooney movie over a half-empty pizza box". Um, Who says I don't WANT to or CHOSE TO have this kind of Valentine's Day?! I mean seriously, this sounds classy (they just forgot the wine).
  6. On cheating: “that’s a thing that girls let slide, because you have to.” This is ABSOLUTELY NOT true. Cheating should never be ok...EVER. Even if you are married to Tiger Woods and he is loaded, but a sleazy sex addict...cheating should never slide.
  7. Finally, my favorite comment of the thousands: "look at the majors of the girls in this article -- none in science or math fields -- so they are probably not meeting guys in classes, only in bars. If you want to see the complete opposite of this situation, try looking into women majoring in engineering or hard sciences. You wouldn't believe how much fun they are having, even on campuses where the overall gender split is 50/50." HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA WHO IS THIS PERSON KIDDING. Fun and engineering and hard sciences should NEVER be in the same sentence. EVER. So, maybe there were some cool pre-meds (I put myself in this category) but the cool guys fell right into the same stereotype (even if you met them in class). I can think of plenty of situations when I was out and so was that cute guy from my bio lab, drunk off his ass, and going "DUDE. I KNOW YOU", all while attempting to creep on my cute friends. Can you say... AWKWARD.
All in all, going to a school where nerdy boys were suddenly hot boys...I get it...and being single myself I understand this phenomenon completely. However, there is much more to it than sheer numbers. As someone told me in reference to this article "if more men and women had self-respect, numbers would not matter so much" and I could not agree more.

5 comments:

  1. This article is just another in the series "the NYT hates women"... all these articles are written without ANY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE to back them up. And you can't use anecdotal evidence as well, evidence. Ignoring the broader arguments that explore the institutionalized patriarchy that is marriage, this article is really just non-sensical. It is more of a matter of PERCEPTION than actual data. Let's look at some of the examples they use, shall we?

    Okay- NC is 60% female and a school in SC is 66% female. We're talking about percentage differentials of 20% and 32%, or there's approximately 120 and 132 women, respectively, for every 100 men. Now let's look at the anecdotal "evidence": "it is common to see six provocatively clad women hovering around one or two guys at a party or a bar." Now I don't know about you... but 6 to 1 or 6 to 2 ratios (600 women to 100 men or 300 women to 100 men, respectively) are not an accurate representation of the actual situation... it's all about perception. There aren't SIX TIMES as many women, we are just used to viewing men (usually white, I might add) as the "default". To get my point: think if Seinfeld had been 3 chicks and 1 dude - it would have been like sex&the city, or deemed a "chick" show. But, 3 guys + one gal and all of a sudden it's made for 'everyone', it's a neutral comedy. When men are considered the "neutral" or the default, it's going to be perceived as much more out of the ordinary when they are the minority. So, 20% more females looks like 300% more all of a sudden because we're just not generally accustomed to seeing the world like that. (the same social phenomenon also occurs with the presence of minority racial/ethnic groups but it's generally much more accepted to shit on someone for being a woman than for their race).

    This article is just another attempt to scare women into committing to marriage earlier and having lots of babies... because we all know that's what women REALLY want no matter how much they say the opposite. If you walked around on any college campus, you could probably get at least one student to concur with any thesis you put forward. So let me repeat myself, ANECTODAL STORIES ARE NOT EVIDENCE FOR A NATIONWIDE PHENOMENON.

    And as one of those women who would've probably been put in the "samantha jones" category of the world, I take offense to the suggestion that there are women who let guys "get away with things" because if you don't you'll be single. When I treated a guy like shit, did I expect him to keep being nice to me or taking my calls?? NO! and if he did, I would've thought he was a moron. So thanks, NYT, for suggesting that it's an acceptable thing for young women to get treated poorly just to stay with someone... newsflash: that's the same thing domestic violence apologists say. And I broke several guys hearts, as am sure other women have, but no word on how this phenomenon could possibly affect men because it's only the sensitive wimminz that we have to worry about- because OMG their over-emotional feelings might be hurt!

    And for one more slap in the face from the NYT, just try finding a news article about women that isn't in the "fashion & style" section. This has nothing to do with fashion or style, as far as I can tell, but the NYT knows that our little women brains can't handle real news- only stories about fabrics and celebrity gossip.

    ReplyDelete
  2. and I didn't even see the part about engineering/sciences... like, seriously? As a former engineer, I can most certainly tell you that dating / having sex at all is one of the LAST things most of these people are thinking about since, oh I don't know, maybe they are STUDYING ALL THE GOD DAMN TIME BECAUSE THEIR MAJORS ARE SO MUCH HORIFICALLY HARDER?? I don't even know how that one made it past the editor... science h. logic these people are dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  3. HHAAHAHAHA I knew you would have strong opinions on this one.
    I was having trouble understanding how this article was considered evidence. Obviously there are issues on campuses (the 1 in 4 sexual assault for example) that come from expectations and the culture of college and all that is much more worth writing about then blaming girls being slutty or desperate on numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The only thing wrong with the George clooney night besides the lack of wine is a half eaten pizza box. Please - I can totally finish a pie and still enjoy my George.

    ReplyDelete