Feminism: Equality or Matriarchy?

Although all the feminist quotes going around the internet these days shows that patriarchy is still an issue, we have definitely made significant progress in recent years. The quotes show that an issue exists, but they also show that people are aware of the problem. What’s more, the general attitude towards what would be considered a “shrew” is much more positive now. Instead of a bossy woman just being considered an unattractive witch, she can be considered confident and ambitious today (of course, if she takes it too far, she can still be called an unattractive witch – but then that applies to everyone in society).

I think the fundamental idea behind feminism is great, but I'm not particularly fond of the word. The word feminism seems to focus more on the female side of things as opposed to the equality side of things. Because of the more radical feminists out there who seem to think building women up requires breaking men down, the feminist movement has become somewhat of a joke. This is very unfortunate, because it creates increases animosity between some people within society. Depending on how the word is defined, I might or might not consider myself a feminist. Since the term has a very negative connotation nowadays that is very skewed from the dictionary definition of it, I wouldn't consider myself a feminist at all. 

This quote is a solid example of how women are sometimes assessed entirely based on how aesthetically pleasing their body is instead of what type of person they are and what the contribute to society. The more I think about these words, the more I hope it was said in an ironic, sarcastic way.

In my opinion, it’s impossible for men and women to be completely equal because of biological differences, but we should still strive for equality in society. While we should strive for equality, I think that right now, there is far too much unnecessary drama about equality and human rights. I am of the opinion that equality can be achieved in a more efficient manner, but that may just be me being naive (humans can be rather frustrating...). A woman’s person's role inside and outside the home depends on the individual and there is no way to make a quick and easy rule that covers all cases. 

Advancement vs Tradition

"People ruled over others not because they were better people but because they had better guns...."  - Adichie

It seems like this year, we've been focusing a lot on how what we know can be changed by the 'winners', the last man standing, in both history as well as english class. Society and life in general revolves around the idea that the one who has most firepower will end up victorious. For example, in legal disputes, the winner of a case isn't necessarily the one who's correct. The winner is most often the person who can hire the better lawyer. In this example, the figurative firepower is money, because whoever spends the most ends up victorious. Also, like many others have said (and like we learned in history), the winner of the war is granted the ability to mold history to their liking. In these cases, literal firepower determines the winner (or sometimes political power), and the losing side is usually marginalized and neglected. The most obvious example of this (for all of us in America) is shown by the so-called "Indians" who were victims of Columbus' genocide and were even forced to discard their original cultures and identities.

Throughout the course of this year, I've come to realize just how lucky I am to be born into the "winning side". To avoid repeating the mistakes of our predecessors, I think that it is our responsibility to try to keep the "losing sides'" cultures and histories alive, even if they don't always portray a a picturesque image of Americans. Also, I think the descendants of the "losing side" also have an obligation to keep the memory of their ancestors alive, much like the way Grace (or Afamefuna) does in "The Headstrong Historian". While I'm all for advancement, every culture deserves a headstrong historian to keep old traditions from becoming forgotten forever.

Misconceptions of Music

Everyone who knows me knows that I love classical music (especially from the Romantic Era). Unfortunately, popular media often portrays "classical music" as an outdated genre for old, boring people who are rooted in stuffy traditions. I realize that everyone's music tastes are bound to be different, and Chopin doesn't have the hard-hitting bass drops or the catchy refrains of many popular songs nowadays, but I wish that people would listen with an open mind, instead of instantly condemning classical music as bland and only useful for whimsical commercials or movie scenes. I'm not saying that it's perfect and everyone should love it, but I think that people often decide whether or not they like something before they've even tried it. Other than the awe-inspiring finesse and the raw emotions that are conveyed through this genre, I won't elaborate more on why I love classical music (since different music affects different people in different ways). This isn't limited to classical music – it applies to all sorts of genres, or even to popular artists. For example, I have a bias against artists like Justin Bieber and One Direction because of what I've seen in popular media, even though I've never really listened to them. I can't hate on something I've never tried, even if I think I know that I won't like it. If people don't consume media with an open mind, we'll be susceptible to all sorts of single stories.

Here's another example of why judging too early is bad: I used to listen exclusively to classical music and jazz, because I had the preconceived notion that most other genres were trashy and dumb (yeah, I was cringey...). Once I decided to expand my musical taste by listening to everything people recommended to me, I realized that I had been missing out on quite a lot of great music. Of course there's still stuff I don't like, but as I listened to a wider variety of music, my taste became more fleshed out. I used to think that all metal music was ear-splitting and distasteful, but after looking into it a bit more, I found that there is actually a plethora of sub-genres under the label "metal". It turns out that I actually like some facets of just about all genres, even the ones I used to hate. I suppose I'm not really helping my case with this blog post, but it's mildly annoying when people assume that classical is the only genre I listen to.


This depiction of classical music irks me. Just because it was first created long before most other genres doesn't mean it's outdated. (side note: I'd love to have some musicians serenade me while driving, especially since 91.5 fm has ads and not very good sound quality)

Excessive Contemplation and Procrastination

I have a big problem with writing: I ponder and agonize for hours on end, but in the end I often end up writing nothing at all. Even though this problem of mine earned me a rather terrible grade on an in class essay this year, I still think I've greatly improved.

In elementary and middle school, I always had high marks in spelling and grammar because I have a keen eye for minute imperfections. On the other hand, my perfectionism would often create unrealistic expectations for myself. This ironically lowered the quality of my work, especially in elementary and middle school, since I would have to force myself to care less about my assignments so that I had something to turn in by the deadline. I also have a somewhat rebellious side and I typically don't like to follow formulas, as I sometimes feel like they are monotonous and inhibit creativity. In my freshman year, these bad characteristics of me manifested in my writing. I was constantly pessimistic and cynical and I neglected to turn in simple essays because I felt like they weren't nearly good enough (this was often true, because I barely converted any of my thoughts into writing – probably due to a lack of confidence).

So far this year, I've really turned things around, despite my continual struggle with procrastination and sleeping late. I've participated in class discussions more in the first half-semester of this year than I did in my whole freshman year. Also, I'm actually completing my annotation assignments. Overall, I think that my writing style is loosening up a bit, so my thoughts flow more easily. Even if they're imperfect, it's much easier to whittle unfinished writing into a decent essay than to create the whole essay perfectly in one go.

Although I used to pride myself on my vocabulary, I've noticed that I often seem to suffer from lethologica, otherwise known as the tip-of-the-tongue phenomenon. I definitely have room to improve in all aspects of writing, especially efficiency.

Vicariously Living through Literature

I've read three out of the ten most challenged books of 2014: Persepolis, The Kite Runner, and Perks of Being a Wallflower. In all three of these books, I've noticed a very interesting similarity: They're all told in a sincere, intimate tone somewhat akin to a diary or a conversation. Admittedly, they all have some "inappropriate" aspects such as obscene language, violence, and rape. However, it is absurd to ban literature simply because it may upset certain people. I said in an earlier blog post that failure is an essential part of success. In the same way, knowledge of bad things is necessary for us to appreciate the good things in life. Many parents try to protect their children by raising them far away from any dangerous influences, but it very often backfires and results in one of two things: their child becomes overly dependent and doesn't know how to function without someone holding his or her hand, or their child becomes rebellious and indulges in said dangerous activities after his or her parents are gone.

Out of the three books, The Kite Runner was probably my favorite. I remember carrying it around the whole day and much like Luo, eating was less important to me than finishing the book. The story of the novel isn't pretty, but it forges a strong connection between reader and writer. When we read, we often live the characters' lives vicariously through the text on the page. Everyone knows of the saying, "Learn from your mistakes." By reading of the struggles of a diverse variety of people from different walks of life, we learn of how they deal with their problems and we learn to apply their situations to our own.

If books like these were banned, I would probably still read them if I knew I could get away with it. On the other hand, if they had been banned my whole life and I never had the joy of reading anything, I might not risk it. If I catch a glimpse outside of the cave, my curiosity would get the better of me and I would try hard to surreptitiously find books to read.
I remember reading somewhere that Fahrenheit 451 was banned in certain places. I find that hilariously ironic.

Is the Allegory of the Cave Outdated?

Although our world has certainly become more technologically advanced in the past few thousands of years, the "Allegory of the Cave" still applies. As a direct reference to Plato's famous allegory, the oft referenced movie "The Matrix" presents the same exact situation, but with an advanced simulation tailored for the peoples' minds as opposed to a parade of shadows across a wall.

The allegory can easily be extended to religion - what if God is actually controlling everything we see and do and free will is nothing but an idea? After all, it would be easier to create a simulation of a world than to create an actually palpable world, wouldn't it?

In my opinion, our exponentially advancing technology has made the allegory even more relevant to our lives today. With improvements in virtual reality, it has become less of a stretch to consider the possibility that our world is nothing but a mere projection of something, or someone's imagination. Although I say that the allegory is relevant, I prefer not to expend my brainpower on considering the reality of my existence. While it would certainly be interesting to absquatulate from the cave and see the "true world", I can't help but feel wary of it. After years with his eyes wide open, Cypher decided in the end that ignorance is bliss and ultimately decided to go right back into the cave. Even though I'm curious and I haven't opened my eyes completely yet, I figure that the real world will show itself to me if it's truly necessary, or maybe I'll find out after I've died.

Should Children be Sheltered from Loss?

Too much pressure on kids to perform well is, without a doubt, unhealthy (there are some youngsters who improve and thrive under pressure, but I think this can be attributed in part to effective parenting). However, does this pressure really stem from the fact that there is a winner and there is a loser? I do not believe so. While the increasingly popular trend to say "everyone's a winner" mitigates some of the negative aspects of excessively competitive sports, the real culprit of this issue lies in the culture of winning and losing. Losing does not mean you have failed because no matter how badly you did, you can always learn from your past experiences. I'm not saying that everyone's a winner, it's obvious that the person who lost is still the loser. However, loss can be an even more effective teacher than success, and as a society, we need to learn how to maximize the positive side of a failure. Parents often get way too invested in their kid's scoresheet, and fail to teach their children the more important result of games: experience. Some parents even go to extremes and show children the ugly side of competition, as this article by the Washington Times details. In the end, the lack of a scoresheet is harmful to the development of children because it negates failure, a core aspect of life that should be learned sooner rather than later.

Additionally, without failure, we can't know what true success is. If winning and losing are equivalent, what's the point of putting in more work to win? If I could win the Olympics just by "giving it my all", what's the point of improving? The reality is, improvements cannot be made without failure. There is a plethora of inspiring quotes about failure (with irrelevant background pictures) and as cliche as they may be, they are often very true.

Are we raising a generation of wimps by coddling and refusing to let them experience the pain of failure? In some ways, yes. If not wimps, we're raising a bunch of sniveling, snobby sore-losers. [Side note: I may sound especially critical because I don't have an iota of respect to spare for sore losers.] I remember reading an article some time ago (a month, perhaps?) about losing with grace, and after a quick minute of using Google, I found it here. Even though I enjoyed the article and think it offers many good points, I find it somewhat disconcerting that it was posted in "The Art of Manliness". Losing with dignity is a principle that applies to everyone and should be ingrained in children from a young age, regardless of gender, ethnicity, or class.