243956423641891
Frozen appeals to boys and girls alike and that may be its most important contribution. In our book A Womb of Her Own, (Routledge, 2017) Dr. Doris Silverman points out the changes that have occurred since The Little Mermaid came out over two decades earlier. She writes: This is the story of two sisters and their love for each other. The older daughter, Elsa, is cursed with unusual power. She can turn everything to ice. During the course of growing up she secluded herself in her room, fearful of her great power because when she was young she accidently hurt her younger sister. A troll healed the younger sister Anna and made her forget her sister’s powers. When the parents, the king and queen, die, Elsa is to become the next queen. She and her sister fight because her younger sister Anna has made an unfortunate, hasty decision to marry, a deceptive, evil but handsome Duke. Elsa knows this and refuses to grant her sister permission to marry. They fight and Elsa unleashes her power turning everything into cold, icy winter. She is after all the Snow Queen, of an old Hans Christian Anderson tale. Everyone in her kingdom is unhappy to live in a frozen and congealed winter prison. Elsa realizes she cannot royally manage the kingdom and she departs and builds herself a remote ice castle removed from civilization. Alone, climbing to her icy aerie, she sings a powerful song, about not having to live the life of a perfect, well-behaved girl who conceals her consuming emotions. She sings the hit song from the movie, Let It Go, simultaneously throwing icy stalagmites and stalactites through the air, stamping her feet producing marvelous geometric ice shapes, her arms offering artfully floating curlicues of snow, her body movements transforming the landscape with kaleidoscopic forms of icy bridges, and voluminous crystal formations. Although I will present many of the features that demonstrate an enhanced thematic characterization of female roles in a current Disney picture there is also a stereotypic reliance on old sexist notions about beauty and appearance .for women. As Elsa sings her song of independence, she increasingly takes on characteristics of a Barbie doll. She flings her hair about so that it is long and loosened, not the more prim appearance when we first see her. As queen she wears a modest dress that completely covers her body. In her song of freedom she wears a sexy off the shoulder dress, with a couturier design of the skirt part of the dress that is split up the middle. The outfit highlights her idealized small waist and curvaceous figure. This new look is that of the typically enticing sexy woman that she is supposed to have given up in her quest for isolation. Here is the more familiar and traditional objectification of females based on their bodily appearance that the Disney movie highlights.
0 Comments
How do we give thanks in a world that is blighted with terrorism, grinding poverty, racism, nuclear threats and the like? Do we ask our children to name the things they are grateful for or do we tell them about the mass shootings? How do we ask a nine-year-old to give thanks when he wants to know if kids were killed in Vegas or LA? My answer is that we consider both questions. This is the world in which we live—a world of love and hate, beauty and savagery, integrity and deception. To pretend otherwise is to do our children a disservice for they are the citizens of the future. It will be up to them someday to build our society and to tip the scales toward good instead of evil. So what do we express to them this Thanksgiving Day? My preference is for disclosure—based upon the age of the children. Remember children WERE killed in these savage attacks as they are in every war situation. The innocent are not immune to danger. Whatever we tell them will never be as frightening as the reality that many children have already faced. But we do have the opportunity to fashion our account to the capacity of the child to understand. Very young children can and should be told little about the nature of terrorism. Elementary school children can be told the facts but without the horrifying details. For middle school children it can be helpful to determine what they know or what they have already heard. We can often correct misconceptions and address fears that they have not been willing to share with their peers. High school youngsters are likely to be discussing the events in school and can usually handle the details. Again though it is unnecessary to flood them with the barbaric nature of these atrocities. They are more than most adults can handle. The question of why these events occurred is far tougher. Adults have no answers so why should the children? I believe however that it is an opportunity to talk to children about one’s philosophy of life. We can address broader questions of good and evil. We can talk about prejudice and bigotry and the needs of some to compel others, often in brutal ways, to adhere to their way of life. We can discuss ways that we as individuals and as groups can foster peace, tolerance and acceptance of people—classmates who may appear different or coaches and teammates who are so competitive as to make us uncomfortable. We can recognize the loving things that others do for us or that we do for each other. We can express gratitude for the myriad of things that bring us joy: a spectacular fall day with a bright blue sky and red-orange leaves on the trees; a compliment from a friend; moments of solitude; the knowledge that a dear neighbor is recovering from breast cancer; the scent of cinnamon rolls and pecan pies baking in the oven; a long-awaited trip to England; going to Disneyland with three grandchildren and surprising them with that plan on Thanksgiving morning;. Do the events that bring us joy cancel out the pain of knowing that terrorists are out there waiting to strike? Of course not. Does it make us callous and uncaring if we still take delight in the things of this world? I don’t think so. It means that the world is full of love and joy; pain and terror and that to live in it fully we must acknowledge both. If we are religious as I am we may believe that someday all of this will be made right and that good will triumph. That may be true and I hope that it is but it is not that way in the world at present. Evil is rampant and it might prevail if, as the saying goes, good men and women do nothing. So now is the time for all of us—men, women and children—to step forward and make our presence known—wherever we are and in whatever way we can. Be a loving person! Do good deeds! Do them every day! We all know what it is to do kind things: even the smallest child understands it. For in the end Love is a bridge that can unite us all. For now it is the only bridge, the only meaning. Allow me to conclude with the song from my favorite ride at Disneyland: It’s a world of laughter, a world of tears It’s a world of hopes and a world of fears There’s so much that we share that it’s time we’re aware It’s a small world after all Contemporary movies illustrate the back and forth progress of our images of women in the culture. In our book A Womb of Her Own (Routledge, 2017) Doris Silverman continues her comparison of the movies Frozen and the Little Mermaid. She writes: Almost two and a half decades later, the film “Frozen” arrives. This is the story of two sisters and their love for each other. The older daughter, Elsa, is cursed with unusual power. She can turn everything to ice. During the course of growing up she secluded herself in her room, fearful of her great power because when she was young she accidently hurt her younger sister. A troll healed the younger sister Anna and made her forget her sister’s powers. When the parents, the king and queen, die, Elsa is to become the next queen. She and her sister fight because her younger sister Anna has made an unfortunate, hasty decision to marry, a deceptive, evil but handsome Duke. Elsa knows this and refuses to grant her sister permission to marry. They fight and Elsa unleashes her power turning everything into cold, icy winter. She is after all the Snow Queen, of an old Hans Christian Anderson tale. Everyone in her kingdom is unhappy to live in a frozen and congealed winter prison. Elsa realizes she cannot royally manage the kingdom and she departs and builds herself a remote ice castle removed from civilization. Alone, climbing to her icy aerie, she sings a powerful song, about not having to live the life of a perfect, well-behaved girl who conceals her consuming emotions. She sings the hit song from the movie, Let It Go, with a sense of abundant, robust freedom…I would have loved for readers to see my 5- year-old grandson stand where you can see him and have him sing this song unabashedly, as he did for me, imitating all her movements and throwing icy fractals into the air—a marvelous sight indeed. Clearly the appeal is to boys and girls alike! Although I will present many of the features that demonstrate an enhanced thematic characterization of female roles in a current Disney picture there is also a stereotypic reliance on old sexist notions about beauty and appearance .for women. As Elsa sings her song of independence, she increasingly takes on characteristics of a Barbie doll. She flings her hair about so that it is long and loosened, not the more prim appearance when we first see her. As queen she wears a modest dress that completely covers her body. In her song of freedom she wears a sexy off the shoulder dress, with a couturier design of the skirt part of the dress that is split up the middle. The outfit highlights her idealized small waist and curvaceous figure. This new look is that of the typically enticing sexy woman that she is supposed to have given up in her quest for isolation. Here is the more familiar and traditional objectification of females based on their bodily appearance that the Disney movie highlights. In the progressive features of Frozen, there is a new female anthem of freedom, no longer the silent women, rather one of power, liberty and selfhood. Elsa is willing to tolerate and even endorse isolation, rather than fufill an insistent need to offer up her independence, and confidence to achieve security under the protection of a husband. Elsa’s willingness to remove herself from the world is, of course, the opposite of the Little Mermaid who makes a great self-sacrifice to be part of the human world the goal of which is a significant love relationship. There are a number of dynamic issues that converge on understanding Elsa’s isolation… Elsa is an artist, capable of producing sculptures of icy beauty. They are large, magnificent structures, dizzying swirls of curlicues, gorgeous geometric patterns, icicles that float and lift to the sky. She has filled her world and it is a gratifyingly aesthetic one to behold. Like many artists, she needed to remove herself from civilization, to maintain a hermitic existence to produce beauty (Think of Virginia Wolff who needed “A Room of her Own” to depart and be alone to be generative ( Gillian Silverman, personal communication 2015.) Elsa’s isolating herself can be thought of as a retribution for her aggression, as well as, a transformational sublimation for her creative life. The second important feature of this postmodern fairy tale is the love of two sisters and the enduring trial of Anna to reach and restore their love for one another. This is the unusual point of this tale. The movie also has an unusual ending. Typically, the female protagonist needs the kiss of the strong, handsome prince who loves her and has endured trials which free her from her imprisonment and allows her to marry. True love in Frozen does not come from a man but from a sister who really loves her older sister and wants to restore their loving relationship. The turn is toward another woman rather than a man, a really unusual finality, suggesting all kinds of new partnering which can offer love and caring friendship. I see this as an important revolutionary turn. The media still portrays women as adorable but a little ditzy. In our book A Womb of Her Own (Routledge, 2017), Dr. Doris Silverman describes the images that describe them in a benevolent and yet demeaning way. She writes as follows: Items from advertising and movies capture both the regressive and progressive pulls for women. Consider ads for Cialus, a product that deals with male erectile dysfunction. What is noticeable in the interactions of heterosexual couples in the ads are the marked hierarchical differences in the couple. For example, one ad depicts a woman as enjoying hopping on one foot as she enters the room where he husband sees her hopping. She is caught by surprise apparently because she did not anticipate his presence. The “understanding” husband sees her hopping as a cute, quirky feature and she shyly enjoys his response. A second ad shows a couple playing checkers. The woman jumps a checker and looks up at her husband and beams, while the man follows with jumping two checkers. He is the much smarter and better player but he enjoys her adorable qualities. A third ad illustrates a women cheating at golf. Her man catches her at it, but finds her endearing nevertheless. These ads apparently serve to preserve the power and competence of males, especially since Cialus use represents a loss of virility for them. One way of safeguarding phallocentric behavior and men’s esteem, while hiding their narcissistic vulnerability is by minimizing females—depicting them as the shallow, silly, and feckless ones. Not all ads are like this and they are slowly changing. Yet it is important to recognize that it is still with us. The women in the cialus ads are depicted as younger and less mature; they are not equal to their older male partners… It maintains what Glick and Fiske (1996) have labeled benevolent sexism. Benevolent sexism is a subtle view of the interactive relationship. It is defined by the authors as “characterizing women as pure creatures who ought to be protected, supported and adored and whose love is necessary to make a man complete” (Glick and Fiske, 2001, p. 109). Men demonstrate idealization of the woman in their benevolent sexism attitude and, according to these authors; men view this role as “cherishing” of women. Nevertheless, it continues a hierarchical relationship in which women are seen as unequal and less competent; thereby needing and accepting male superiority and protection. Many women experience benevolent sexism, as comforting and satisfying .and are willing to be in a subordinate position; they appreciate and foster such arrangements. Culturally, such a position is sanctioned. It reflects what Glick and Fiske label as the “good woman”. It is a conventional view of women as selfless caregivers, ones who focus on the needs of others whether it is a spouse, children, parents, or friends. Such a stance resists Cicous’ interest in overturning traditional views and writing a unique story of individuality and competence. Switching to film I want to compare a film from 1989 “The Little Mermaid” with the 2013 film “Frozen” that presents a new and distinctly different version of a woman and her love object. Since my own children are grown I’m no longer accustomed to visiting Disney movies. However, I was informed about “Frozen” by my 5 year old grandson who told me about the movie in great detail and encouraged me to see it. The Little Mermaid seems a typical fairy tale story of a princess yearning for the love of a handsome, strong prince. The mermaid initially defies her father, Neptune, the king of the seas, because she is curious about the world. She finds items from the human world that interest her, but above all the attractive, young sailor prince with whom she falls in love. Her father forbids her to pursue anything human; after all she is a mermaid. She risks hazards and the depths of hell to contact an evil sorceress. She wishes to become human so she can be with her gorgeous guy. As is typical there is great testing for both characters. There are turmoil, storms, near-death experiences, and finally romance and the uniting of the mermaid as human with her beloved prince. Even Neptune accepts that his daughter is in love and nothing can be done to sunder this love match. However, forgoing her mermaid hood and becoming human, she gives up her voice and now is a silent woman, the ancient role of females subservient to their men. Next week we will compare The Little Mermaid to the more recent movie Frozen. Do the current practices of sexting, tattooing and hooking up represent gains for women—that is, giving them ownership of their bodies? Doris Silverman, Ph.D. explores this question in her chapter in our book, A Womb of Her Own. (Routledge, 2017) Four decades ago Cixous, (1976) a strong, well-regarded French feminist issued a call to arms for women. She maintained that women suffered under the restraints of a patriarchal society. They were reduced to a subsidiary role. She wanted females to demonstrate their unique voices, to write their experiences, to own and honor their bodies and their unique singularities. Yes, women were marginalized by the dominant andocentric culture. However, as Cixous argued, there were narrow passageways, disorienting marginalia, wherein women can alter and resist the center dominated by the male hierarchy. A personal example of my recognition of phallocentricity and its consequences occurred during that period when I was a graduate student at The Research Center for Mental Health, part of the doctoral program at NYU. It was a hot-bed of empirical research. I slowly realized that all the experimental subjects conducted then had only male subjects. When I questioned this issue the information I was told that “females mess up the data” and so they were omitted from research. Marginalized! This led to my support of experimental research on females: my professional focus and published work dealt frequently with sex, gender, and developmental issues for females, and I maintained an affiliation with Division 35. Feminists, including psychoanalysts, responded to Cixous’ call. Views about female sexuality were initially the only focus. The relevance of the concept of gender wasn’t entertained until the feminists in the 70’s began making distinctions between sex and gender. Women researchers began studying and writing about the female experience; their research reflected both domains of sex and gender. We seemed to be on a revolutionary road. Now many decades have past. How have we fared? There are major advances for women that are always being touted even though we continue to be fewer in number in many important positions. . Nonetheless, there are now more female executives, heads of universities, deans, department heads and professors even at Ivy League universities. More women are now in Congress. We have two serious Presidential contenders. Women function as anchors on TV and we maintain important voices on radio. Our own field has changed dramatically and it is filled with smart, competent females who are role models. We no longer are an almost exclusive female audience with males dominating the lectern at professional meetings. Recently I finished a 12 year terms as head of the Rapaport-Klein Study group. This was a group surrounding David Rapaport, a brilliant theoretician of psychoanalysis, who had enormous influence on his male students and colleagues. It was initially an all male power-house of intellectual brilliance, and it was maintained that way for a considerable period of time. A female broke the intellectual barrier. Significant gains have definitely been made but if we look more closely at the various ways in which the culture reflects the prevailing views of women I believe a different picture emerges. I will first briefly explore advertising and the media as highly significant barometers of the societal views of women. I will then consider the new sexual mores exemplified in tattooing, sexting and hooking up that reflect contemporary societal views and more relevant feminist views. Did you see the TIME magazine cover for October 30 0f 2017? In the 21st century society is still telling women how to mother. The article describes the mandates to breast-feed and to pursue “natural” childbirth without painkillers. To do so will, or so it goes, provide the mother with a radiant experience of her role in the process of birthing a child. It then points out the pressure it places on mothers who cannot accomplish all of these “natural” accoutrements of motherhood. In the same issue, Siobhan O’Conner writes that “the rules of pregnancy are meant to prepare women for life as a mother—a life where every choice is one of sacrifice, where putting another’s well-being before your own is paramount.” Does the life of the fetus always take precedence over the life and well-being of the mother? I remember a movie many years ago in which a man had to decide between his wife and the fetus. Both could not survive. According to the dictates of his religion he had to choose the fetus. It was a heart-breaking moment. I recall nothing else about the movie but that tragic scene stuck in my mind as I approached new motherhood. In a paper which I presented this past weekend at the Association for Psychoanalysis and Culture (APCS) I addressed the puzzling contradiction in which mothers’ SUBJECTIVE experience is largely invisible while they are at the same time BLAMED for the evils that befall humanity. As early as 1982 Jacob Arlow (Scientific Forum) stated that “indicting mothers was an activity with an extensive legacy, universal in its reach, embedded in human psychology, and influenced by an invisible scrim of shared unconscious fantasies.” (p.66) Theresa Bernardez stated that “…many psychoanalytic writings, despite their valid contributions, lead to the notion of absolute responsibility on the part of the mother, not only for the infant’s survival but also for the infant’s unimpeded development and adequate mental health.” (The “good-enough” environment for “good-enough” mothering. The Inner World of the Mother, ed. D. Mendell and P. Turrini, pp.299-317. Madison, CT: Psychosocial Press. 2003) Mother as a reactive three-dimensional human being—at best, distractible, preoccupied, overwhelmed, exhausted and at worst, frightened, ill, hungry, over-worked and alone—has no place in this model of optimal human development. In fact a mother’s real and authentic feelings are expressly forbidden. If the mother were to show her authentic emotion she might overwhelm the infant. If, because of her own lack of emotional regulation, a mother were to respond to the baby’s negative emotion and produce a real emotion of her own, she could seriously impact the baby’s emotional development. If the mother’s response misperceives the baby’s emotion, it also derails the infant’s developing sense of self. Researchers and clinicians claim that the mother’s needs must in no way impinge upon the infant. Her task, her only task, is that of mirroring and tuning in with ever-present attention and involvement. In our minds and in our fantasies we all hope for the “Leave It to Beaver” mother—attuned, empathic, self-sacrificing and waiting at the door with a plate of warm cookies. Thus we still retain a view of mothering that obliterates decades of progress in other areas of women’s lives. Mother is supposed to be a well-spring of love, patience and protectiveness. In the best of circumstances she is a force for good, the all-giving Mother Goddess or Mother Nature—filling the earth with the flowers of Spring or the bounty of Autumn. In the worst of times she is Satan Incarnate, or a killer tornado that destroys everything in its path. In reality “mother” is one of the last outposts of human contact in an ever-increasingly impersonal world. It is not just what she does but it is her very being in which we hope to be grounded. Fathers do tasks and are greatly rewarded for their efforts. Mothers are the invisible background from which we emerge as human beings. Their complex responses to their children go unrecognized. It is part of their nature. Were we to analyze and acknowledge the “mind of mother” we could devolve into chaos and anarchy. So we call her an environment, an object and even in our most sophisticated theories fail to grant her individualism. To view mother as an individual means that we disentangle our deeply-held beliefs from the complex interweaving of biology and male dominance that has held us captive and then consider different and disturbing data that has seldom entered our conscious minds. The concept of mother—the shadowy presence that, for good or ill, infuses all of our lives—as anything other than an always-available, largely invisible, primal energy may be terrifying to contemplate. The point of the TIME article is that mother is an individual. She has the right to make decisions herself about breast-feeding, birthing and pain medication. My presentation carries that argument further to say that, short of abuse or neglect, a mother is her own authority throughout the long years of child-rearing. If we want that perfectly warm and cuddly environment, then we all need to step in and participate because it is not all on a mothers’ shoulders! The ideal circumstance that we all hold in our fantasies will be possible only if society supports the significant task of raising children! The story of Harvey Weinstein has brought the reality of a rape culture front and center. So I felt inclined to post a blog that I have posted before. As I said then, it is time to speak frankly about the rape culture in which we live. It is time for women and decent men to call it for what it is: a degrading and tragic affront to women and all victims of sexual assault. It can no longer be considered an acceptable way of “doing business” or maintaining power. It is problematic however, that our current president accepts and participates in this type of behavior. As I said, the current political climate has brought into the open a level of discourse that has never before been in the public arena. For the first time in my lifetime, the presidential campaign was X-rated. We couldn’t let our children watch it or discuss the commentary in elementary school. We couldn’t address the “hot” topics that were making headlines. But the electorate has made clear that we are living in a country that tolerates degrading comments about women and an acceptance of sexual assault by its leaders. The election is over and we have chosen a viewpoint that reinforces a rape culture. Those women who have suffered sexual assault in any form recognize it for what it is. Our task as parents is that of making our daughters aware of it and helping our sons become responsible for changing it. What perspective can we give our daughters when the newly elected leader of the free world talks about grabbing “p_____” or advocates forcing himself on women because he is rich and powerful? How do we make them understand that this message is not meant for them and that they can resist unwanted advances no matter the position of the person or the importance of the situation? We can protect them when they are young and in the home but what about when they go to college or take a job in a faraway city? How do we teach them to protect themselves? First, we must help them separate the morality and lifestyle of a leader from his or her ability to govern in political or financial matters. Sadly enough, many of our leaders are not exemplars of decency or integrity in their personal dealings. Our children, girls and boys, must often look elsewhere for moral leadership. Parents who meet those requirements are an excellent choice! Then we must speak frankly about the reality of a rape culture. The old idea that women and girls are seductresses whose “come hither” behavior overwhelms men’s ability to control themselves is and has always been a way for men to project their lack of restraint onto women. Too many men feel entitled to fulfill their own desires at the expense of women who have neither seduced them nor consented. The prevalence of a rape culture on college campuses or in the military is a reality. Unfortunately, if females want to ensure their own safety they must limit their activities. That is, becoming intoxicated at a fraternity party is a recipe for disaster. Women have not “taken back the night” and, in fact, are not safe walking alone in the dark. Girls and their mothers and grandmothers must also undergo an attitude change. For too long females have been taught that their proper role is one of obedience and submission. Women have been told that men are in charge and that they will protect and provide for their families. Some men do and they should be congratulated for doing so. But women in great numbers are also providing and protecting their families as the breadwinners and sole supporters. Even if they are not the breadwinners they do a great deal to ensure that their families function well. It is time that they realize that they are the strong ones and that their strength should also be acknowledged and congratulated. It seems that many women are still looking for a savior–that strong, handsome and wonderful man who will protect them, save them and provide for all their needs. They believe that they can find and keep him and will apparently pay any price to do so. But sadly enough, he is not out there. It is largely a fantasy that we have held onto far too long. Our best bet is to acknowledge our strength as women, stand up and be counted as equals, and work along with our daughters to build a society that makes us safe in every situation. The “ME TOO” plan is a good one. It is a way for mothers and daughters, friends and loved ones to make known that this tragedy has happened to them. Then it must be followed up with laws and policies that provide sanctions and penalties for those who continue this egregious and uncivilized behavior. In the beginning was Love and the Love was with God and the Love was God. The same was in the beginning with God.
God couldn’t be everywhere so He made Moms and without Moms was not any human made. And Moms turned on the lights when it was dark. And their lights shone in the dark so that the darkness wasn’t so scary. Moms were told long ago that unless children be born of flesh and water and blood, they could not enter the earth. So Moms had a lot of babies. The pain of labor was often so unbearable that they couldn’t even remember it and that was a good thing. Otherwise they might not have done it so many times. Now one Mom and Dad had sons. The Dad was good and the sons were also good. Now one of the sons came down and he saw that it was good. His name was Aaron. He said to his brother, “Come on down. It’s fun here.” And his brother’s name was Matthew. Then the brothers told Daniel and David to come down so they could have some “cacklin’ times” (telling jokes about their parents and laughing hysterically.) So they came and it was good. They were good, good sons! It turned out that this Mom could perform miracles. She could take a box of dry pasta and turn it into The Real Kind (delicious Macaroni and Cheese.) Sometimes the sons brought home friends from school. They gathered and were hungry. The Mom took pizza and multiplied it many times over and they were fed. The Mom took care of them when they were sick. She and the Dad performed many miracles. They took them to the ER when they had broken bones or an asthma attack. They put bandages on their cuts and kissed their bruises. Sometimes they put a cool cloth on their heads and their fevers broke. Then Mom would say, “Rise up and get thee to school.” Still, there were times when she got angry. When their house got too messy, she would take a scourge of small cords and threaten her sons. She would never hit them but she would turn them out of the house to play in the snow. Sometimes she would go to the mountain alone for she needed rest. They feared she might not return but she came back. Her faith was such that she could walk across the rubble they had left and calm their troubled spirits. The Mom and Dad taught their sons. They taught them about love and about being kind to others and treating their brothers well and sharing with those in need. But the sons didn’t always hear and they didn’t always see. They were busy playing basketball and gymnastics and tennis. Their giant shoes were smelly and they cared not. They kicked holes in the walls and they knew it not. They “beasted” (tormented in endless and creative ways like turning a laundry hamper upside down on your baby brother) upon their brothers and their brothers returned in kind. But then the sons became parents and suddenly their eyes were opened. They heard and understood the lessons their parents had taught them. And the parents laughed and laughed. This Mom found that her path was hard and strewn with thorns and briars. She discovered that she had planted some of them herself! She prayed. She prayed for relief from the never-ending work. She prayed for deliverance from her own weaknesses, her anger and her despair. Sometimes when she prayed she couldn’t hear anything. Her ears were filled with wax. She clung to the Dad or they clung to each other for they felt lost. But then a Voice would come, a Voice of Holy Wisdom from the One whose life she tried to emulate. It would speak with perfect clarity: “This is a Holy Place and you are doing Holy Work.” “Really? Really?” she would answer. “But I am such a mess!” But the Voice would answer, “Yes. But you are a Holy Mess!” Through it all the Mom loved her children as had her mother before her in her own imperfect way. As had all the Mothers through the ages, those same Mothers who had brought Love to Life. “I pray for them” the Mothers said. “I pray not for the world, (of wars and battles; of politics and power; of progress and prosperity) but for them which thou hast given me. I pray for these children that are in the world and I pray that none of them will be lost. Thou hast sent me into the world, and now I also have sent them into the world; that the Love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them and I also in them, full of Grace and Truth.” Amen. When women thrive, all of society benefits, and succeeding generations are given a better start in life. Kofi Annan (United Nations Press Release, December 4, 2001)
"Full democracy requires the full participation of women. Your voices are vital. The word 'vital' means necessary for life. A democracy, to be fully alive, must include all its citizens." Swanee Hunt. (Far East Bloc Women, A Dearth of Democracy, 1997, July 10). The New York Times. “Deeply rooted discrimination against women in the political, economic, social and cultural spheres weakens society as a whole,” said Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (Pillay,March 9, 2009), on the occasion of International Women’s Day. When women succeed, the public benefits. The inequality of wages and work performance has been trumped by research. In aggregate, these reports provide evidence that women have the potential to add significant value to a company. Studies show that men would reap more benefits if women were more equally incorporated. (Sandberg,S., & Grant, A. (2015) When it comes to investment strategies, women are more conservative than men and more risk averse. They also tend to invest for the longer term, a trait that can result in less-volatile returns. And recent evidence suggests that women may do better than men in short-term investing. A study of hedge funds run by women found that they outperform funds run by men. Another study of retail investors found that men traded 45 percent more than women in their own accounts, but earned 2.65 percent less. (money.cnn.com, Female investors often beat men by Heather Long, February 19, 2005). Gender equality means women will have better pay, higher positions, and more respect, but what do men gain? Studies show that women offer new knowledge, skills, and networks, take fewer unnecessary risks and are more inclined to contribute in ways that make their teams and organizations better. When women succeed, men also succeed. If this is indeed a war, women have only just begun to fight. At present the sense of outrage seems relatively mild and scattered. There is not an organized mobilization in which most women can engage. Nobel Peace Prize recipient Leymah Gbowee of Liberia spoke recently at a meeting and asked, “Where are the angry American women?” (The Daily Post, Talk with Tina Brown, March 9, 2012) Women who are beginning to answer the call have come forward, run for office, and been elected. Congresswomen are increasingly willing to pounce on misogyny or anything resembling it. (Chozick and Martin, 2015). In November 2014, many independent and conservative women voted for Democrats. During that election, Emily’s List supported and endorsed a record number of female candidates, 11 for the US Senate and 27 for the House. Emily’s List doubled its membership in 2014 and raised more money for more candidates than at any other time in its 27-year history. The rising numbers of women in the workplace will chip away at the disadvantages that women face. And if women really do mobilize en masse and bring their unique characteristics to bear, it could transform the way that Wall Street does business. In October 2014, Gloria Steinem, political activist, and feminist organizer, put out an email urging women to seize their ballot power. She wrote, “The GOP hasn’t passed Equal Pay laws and they constantly deny women their basic rights to make decisions about their own bodies.” (Chumley, 2014) Silence is the enemy. The national conversation about gender equality must not be ignored any longer. By denying this reality, we feed the oppression. The many faces of prejudice and bigotry continue to surface in our national identity. How can we understand this near universal propensity for vilifying people who are different from us? It touches every minority and every race or religious group. In our most private relationships it extends to the domination of women. In our book A Womb of Her Own (Routledge, 2017) we have included several hypotheses that explain this phenomenon. Eric Erickson (1959) hypothesized that each human group became convinced it was the sole possessor of the true human identity. Thus, each group also became a pseudo-species, adopting an attitude of superiority over others. He called the process pseudo-specialization. Historically Erikson postulated, each group developed a distinct sense of identity wearing skins and feathers like armor to protect them from other groups who wore different kinds of skins. For many males, this attitude persists. Women, viewed as the “other,” are often met with overt hostility when they enter the workplace. Assertive businesswomen are not seen as brilliant or knowledgeable, but as bossy and annoying. The current male-driven culture makes it difficult for strong women to succeed. Other psychoanalytic theorists have attempted to explain women’s status as the “other,” a disdained minority. From the earliest relationship with their mothers, males both fear and desire women. Men’s earliest human experience is with the mother. According to Elise (1998), the infant is the recipient of the mother’s penetration and becomes a penetrator by identification with the mother. To penetrate and to be penetrated form a core of sexual excitement as psychic and physical boundaries are crossed. Otto Kernberg (Kernberg and Rosenfeld 1991) reiterates that these polymorphous perverse features are a crucial aspect of normal sexuality. Males have an early bodily experience, a receptive excitement, and enlivened sense of interiority, which then closes down and leads to a masculine focus on externality. Other theorists such as (Bowlby, J., MD, (1960) Separation Anxiety) postulate that the hatred of women results from the boy’s grieving the maternal loss and the loss of a part of himself as a man. The male must then identify with the powerful phallic father on whom is projected the mother’s original omnipotence. Maternal sexual activity is appropriated to the masculine and infantile passivity is attributed to the mother, the feminine sexual object. Bowlby noted that the denigration of women confirms male power over women and masks any dependency need and vulnerability. Benjamin Schmidt(1995) underscores that narcissism is centrally involved in fostering the son’s identification with a powerful father, who has a significant stake in his son’s identification with him. The penis then becomes imbued with magical qualities, power, and phallo-centrism. Operating as a combined defense against maternal omnipotence and male fears regarding the inner body and castration, the penis is frequently used as a manic defense against mourning the intolerable loss of the mother. In the face of fear and loss, the denigration of women wins out. |
Ellen Toronto is a clinical psychologist in private practice in Spring, Texas and has been practicing since 1980. In 2017, she was elected a Fellow in Psychoanalysis by the American Psychological Association. In 2016, Dr. Toronto's practice was recognized as one of the top Ann Arbor Psychology practices. She received her Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Michigan. Dr. Toronto is married to Robert Toronto, Ph.D., and together they have four sons and eleven grandchildren. |