“Can someone turn off her microphone so I can talk?" Ben Carson, 10/14/16
I had some friends over for dinner the other night. They were all men, which seems a bit odd, but it isn't. Over the years, I've adapted to a role of "one of the boys," because I thought my demeanor and attitudes were more masculine than feminine. I enjoy discussing the state of the world, and it seemed to me that men tended to go there more than women. Plus, I got a first hand look at how men react to the news of the day. They're nice guys, one and all.
So, there we were discussing a topic of the day, when one of the men, albeit the most vocal and cock-sure of them, started talking over my words. It doesn't matter what we thought on the subject. What mattered to me was the fact that I was not being heard because my opinion was "emotional" and a "micro-view" of the Real Problem. Those darned women!
Each time I tried to speak, this friend spoke over me. Finally, he tried to explain the concept of Dialectic: "First one of us speaks, then the other, and then we come to a consensus." Philosophy 101. Duh. I was being schooled on how to properly argue by a man who was essentially turning off my microphone by speaking louder and more forcefully. And this was a friend! Imagine if he was an opponent for political office, or a co-worker competing for the same job. I felt belittled and angry. His response was to lower his voice and say, "I made my point without getting angry." Like that's some BFD. No. I am the woman who rolls my eyes at mansplaining.
So, what's my take-away from a contentious dinner conversation? This: Women make up 51% of the population. Wake up, men! We will be heard, and it might mean we don't play by your conventional rules. We may very well get emotional when a situation calls for anger, love, celebration, or sadness. We may very well give specific examples to back up our thoughts, and if that's a "micro-view," so be it. I call it evidence.
The microphone is our right, and because of it, I would love to see women take one specific page from the masculine conversational rule book and raise our voices over the vapid, masculine, sports team, I-win/you-lose mentality that has overtaken U.S. politics. "We're number one!!!" Each party, Democrats, Republicans, and minor league "teams" feel they must "win" at all cost. How stupid is that? Serious problems deserve serious discourse. The false dichotomy of winning an argument, winning a conflict, or winning a war implies a loser. Thus, the cycle of resentment, revenge, and conflict continues. The need to win political power has cost us a stable middle class, national security, and balanced judgement. Oh, but we're on the winning team! ... fuck that. The failure of the Republican Party to hold a reasoned conversation with their Democratic colleagues is of the "I'm taking my ball home until I get my way" mentality. Spoiled brats. And the failure of the Democratic Party to understand the legitimate concerns of blue-collar workers who now must work three service jobs to replace the one union job they used to hold - stinks of elitism. It's old-school Republican "I got mine, now go get your own" entitlement. It's time to listen respectfully to what the other folks are saying. Then maybe we can come to a consensus. I give credit to Bernie, who is bending the conversation toward civility and good citizenship.
And women will be heard. Next step: The Second Female President of the United States. Michelle Obama's thoughtful speech on the sorry specter of Donald Trump imposing his madness on our daily lives made me pause. Women are discussing the state of the world with emotional dignity. I grow ever more grateful for my conversations with intelligent female friends. Lately, heartfelt talks with women writers, artists, entrepreneurs, and poets have given me hope for the future of humanity. I abhor the intellectual vacuum sucking the air out of our political discourse because so many middle-aged white men cannot stomach "losing" the White House to a woman who played their loaded game. One day a savvy, younger woman will forge her own way up, but Hilary is older; she played by all the rules written by old men, and she's earned the votes to become our next president. You want to take your ball home, not vote, and hold your breath until she goes away? Perhaps you want to cast a protest vote for Gary or Jill, neither of whom registers on the "who gives a hoot" Richter scale. I disagree with your premise - that Hillary is different from any male politician before her, other than her experience and qualifications, but that's your right. What blindingly bewilders me are the folks who would actually cast a vote for an ill-informed, blathering, blubbering, man-baby to become president in her stead? Really... who is being emotional now?
The microphone is on. Get used to it, Ben.
I had some friends over for dinner the other night. They were all men, which seems a bit odd, but it isn't. Over the years, I've adapted to a role of "one of the boys," because I thought my demeanor and attitudes were more masculine than feminine. I enjoy discussing the state of the world, and it seemed to me that men tended to go there more than women. Plus, I got a first hand look at how men react to the news of the day. They're nice guys, one and all.
So, there we were discussing a topic of the day, when one of the men, albeit the most vocal and cock-sure of them, started talking over my words. It doesn't matter what we thought on the subject. What mattered to me was the fact that I was not being heard because my opinion was "emotional" and a "micro-view" of the Real Problem. Those darned women!
Each time I tried to speak, this friend spoke over me. Finally, he tried to explain the concept of Dialectic: "First one of us speaks, then the other, and then we come to a consensus." Philosophy 101. Duh. I was being schooled on how to properly argue by a man who was essentially turning off my microphone by speaking louder and more forcefully. And this was a friend! Imagine if he was an opponent for political office, or a co-worker competing for the same job. I felt belittled and angry. His response was to lower his voice and say, "I made my point without getting angry." Like that's some BFD. No. I am the woman who rolls my eyes at mansplaining.
So, what's my take-away from a contentious dinner conversation? This: Women make up 51% of the population. Wake up, men! We will be heard, and it might mean we don't play by your conventional rules. We may very well get emotional when a situation calls for anger, love, celebration, or sadness. We may very well give specific examples to back up our thoughts, and if that's a "micro-view," so be it. I call it evidence.
The microphone is our right, and because of it, I would love to see women take one specific page from the masculine conversational rule book and raise our voices over the vapid, masculine, sports team, I-win/you-lose mentality that has overtaken U.S. politics. "We're number one!!!" Each party, Democrats, Republicans, and minor league "teams" feel they must "win" at all cost. How stupid is that? Serious problems deserve serious discourse. The false dichotomy of winning an argument, winning a conflict, or winning a war implies a loser. Thus, the cycle of resentment, revenge, and conflict continues. The need to win political power has cost us a stable middle class, national security, and balanced judgement. Oh, but we're on the winning team! ... fuck that. The failure of the Republican Party to hold a reasoned conversation with their Democratic colleagues is of the "I'm taking my ball home until I get my way" mentality. Spoiled brats. And the failure of the Democratic Party to understand the legitimate concerns of blue-collar workers who now must work three service jobs to replace the one union job they used to hold - stinks of elitism. It's old-school Republican "I got mine, now go get your own" entitlement. It's time to listen respectfully to what the other folks are saying. Then maybe we can come to a consensus. I give credit to Bernie, who is bending the conversation toward civility and good citizenship.
And women will be heard. Next step: The Second Female President of the United States. Michelle Obama's thoughtful speech on the sorry specter of Donald Trump imposing his madness on our daily lives made me pause. Women are discussing the state of the world with emotional dignity. I grow ever more grateful for my conversations with intelligent female friends. Lately, heartfelt talks with women writers, artists, entrepreneurs, and poets have given me hope for the future of humanity. I abhor the intellectual vacuum sucking the air out of our political discourse because so many middle-aged white men cannot stomach "losing" the White House to a woman who played their loaded game. One day a savvy, younger woman will forge her own way up, but Hilary is older; she played by all the rules written by old men, and she's earned the votes to become our next president. You want to take your ball home, not vote, and hold your breath until she goes away? Perhaps you want to cast a protest vote for Gary or Jill, neither of whom registers on the "who gives a hoot" Richter scale. I disagree with your premise - that Hillary is different from any male politician before her, other than her experience and qualifications, but that's your right. What blindingly bewilders me are the folks who would actually cast a vote for an ill-informed, blathering, blubbering, man-baby to become president in her stead? Really... who is being emotional now?
The microphone is on. Get used to it, Ben.
RSS Feed