I tried to avoid this tread, but I can't hold myself back any longer. Warning: what follows may offend
I am a man and proud of it. I make no apologies for being the testosterone-driven human being I am. But the Edwardian men's club of the 20th century is a dead thing of the past (moment of silence. please). Now, welcome to the 21st century.
As a man I not offended by women's only organizations (or any organization that is exclusive) by their existence alone. If a group of people want to belong to a club of like individuals, excluding others they feel are not of the same mind or gender or whatever, then, fine. They have the right to include or exclude anyone they want from their private club. So I have no gripe with anyone supporting the NMWA.
But I take a lot of offence when groups of any kind organize as an exclusive group, to push an agenda outside of the bounds of that group, that infringes on, or hinders the progress or livelihood of any other group or individual.
Now the NMWA is not directly trying to hold any male artist back, but just as affirmative action (although it may have been needed to fight racism), it has today given minority groups an advantage in applying for certain positions. I do not know if the NMWA's shows or their agenda would give a woman artist an undue advantage over men, but if it did, and the tables were turned, you would hear a feminist cry so loud, that the men's organization of its type would be shut down within a month - or at the very least be forced to accept female members.
Now as a man and an artist, I feel I have no great advantage based on my gender. Every day is a constant struggle to further my craft, support my family and prove to the nay Sayers that a being an artist is a true and worthy profession. And, yes, it is a "Real Job", and not some Bohemian way of avoiding "real work". Even in this day of working women, as a married man I am expected to be the primary wage earner, or at the very least, pull my own fair share. Expected by whom you ask? Society. Take a look around, and exclude the few exceptions (for there will always be an exception to the rule). How does this natural selection of our evolution govern whom women choose as their life companions? Even the most successful career women who in no way needs a man for monetary support, will choose a man who is usually at least as successful as she. Even after centuries of evolution, we are still governed by the traditional male/female roles, even if only on a subconscious level. In this modern world, the more monetarily successful a man is governs many things: it makes him the alpha male around other men, and it opens up many more choices in who will find him attractive as a partner. And this does not end once you have been lucky enough to find your soulmate - oh, no. If you are to keep your position, you must continue to be a good provider or risk losing to a more dominant male. Now I am not saying that every woman is so shallow that money is the only consideration, or who will leave her husband if he loses his job, or she makes more than him. Not at all. But even in the best marriage, when a man can't for any reason bring in monetary support, it creates, at the very least, tensions within that relationship. Now don't you all e-mail bomb me with a list of exceptions you know of, please. I am fully aware that there are more than a few women making more money than their partners, but in society overall, it is still the minority, not the rule.
So what does this have to do with women in the arts? Plenty. For one, a women married to a successful man is not expected by society to be the primary wage earner, so she is free to pursue art as a career. Now don't get all upset yet; I am fully aware that you also face a harder problem being taking seriously, that it is not just some hobby, for the same reason. But as a man, I face the same problem from my own male counterparts (other artists excluded). They may not say it, but they think it: being an artist is not a "real Job", and not one suited to an alpha male of the 21st century. I also know women have the problem of being expected to be the primary caretaker of the children, even if they also earn as much (or even more) than their spouses, so I am not saying that you have it any easier than us men. I just want to say this: the next time you hear another feminist talk about the glass ceiling, or complain that there are not enough women CEOs, or that women are not as highly paid as men - maybe the man actually put his career above everything else in his life to get what he got. I know more than enough middle-aged and older men who have very strained relations with their wives, sons and daughters because they were never around and always working. So ask yourself this: do you really want what you are asking for? Sure, nature put a undue load on women in the child-bearing department. But business is business, and if a man put his career on hold until his kids were back in school), I doubt you would find he could be held up as one of the most successful and highly paid within his field.
And to all you women who have put your career first, and still feel you are paid less than men who do the same job, I sympathize. I never said these rules laid over years of evolution were fair. And just so you don't feel too bad, I think if you take a real look around, you will find plenty of men who are not any higher paid than you are. Not all men manage to get the top pay, but society won't let them blame anything but themselves for their inability to reach the top level of their career. At least you can blame the Edwardian men's club for keeping you down.
Now that I have disturbed the hornets nest, so to speak, I guess I deserve to get stung by a few but before you all attack, let me add something. I feel if more men and women worked together to establish their roles in society and not in a adversarial manner it would make life a lot easier when those who want to live their life outside of what tradition dictates. Be it the career woman or the man whose spouse earns more then he does or stays home with the kids.
Linear Mode
