Ethnographic Exercise: Gender and Work

My mother has often shared certain frustrations about her work environment. “Sherri just has to talk about penis envy”, “The women at the front are always gossiping about students”, and “The women think that the dean likes me so much because I have a pretty face” are examples of what I get to listen to when I fold my laundry at home every other weekend. My mom’s complaints can often be boiled down to a problem over what is and isn’t proper for the workplace. Should Sherri be talking about penis envy after taking off her uncomfortable shoes and walking around the office bare-foot (because stilettos are in fact the reincarnation of penises)? Should there be more control over student gossip? And should the women and men in the office be suggesting why they really think my mom got her job?

You may have noticed that it almost doesn’t matter where my mom works; these problems happen in all offices. I would like to tackle, just for a day, the dramas of the Undergraduate Advising Office in the OU College of Business. I would like to extend the idea of what is or is not proper for the work place to a discussion over gender: What links exist, if any, between gender rolls and the ability for an office to appear professional?

Observation:

Upon strolling into the Michael F. Price School of Business, one can’t help but to notice the carefully chosen décor, professional color schemes, and gold lettering on the walls paying homage to the kind individuals who made the college possible. This building looks like a business college. Students throughout the building proudly type on their lap tops as if they want all people passing by to know that they will make over $100k someday. The clicking and clacking of polished leather shoes echo in the hall. This is a place of prestige, and surely, the undergraduate advisement office is no exception.

My mom holds the unofficial title of “The Hostess with the Mostest” in this office. Basically, my mom is first in line when it comes to dealing with angry parents, failing students, and important visiting guests. My mom spends much of her day being busy with taking calls, greeting people, scheduling appointments, and informing the counselors about their next appointment. In the time between, conversation is always happening behind the front desk, whether it is between my mom, student workers, or counselors that wander out of their offices. My mom works amongst mostly younger females, about in their 30’s or 40’s. This is what makes my mother’s job interesting; her coworkers hold a melting pot of views very different than her own, and most importantly, know how to get a little rise out of her whenever they like.

Like all good conversation, most subjects talked about behind the front desk end up leading towards inappropriate conversation if the wrong person were to hear. It could be anything, too much information about someone’s boyfriend, someone thinks a student is “cute”, someone thinks so and so is an evil witch, and the list goes on. Knowing my mom better than anyone in the office, I can sense a lot more out of her than any of her coworkers can. The feeling that I get from my mom, more than any other feeling, is a little discomfort and disapproval, both are covered up by a shy giggle every time. The most uncomfortable conversations are spurred when the counselors are involved. If Michael (one of the few men in the office) comes out to check his next appointment and goes back to him office, my mom always has to look over at me to ask in a quiet voice, “Leah, do you think he’s gay?” If Sherri walks into the front with no shoes on, she has to explain why her stilettos represent penises, to which of course my mom has nothing to say in response other than “Sherri, what are you talking about? You’re not thinking!” My mom spends a lot of conversation time acting surprised, and not saying too much unless wedding planning, flowers, or something positive is said.

From what I have gathered, there is a constant administrative effort in place to ensure the professional appearance of this office. In fact, it has been described to me as a constant fight. Do certain gender roles have anything to do with this struggle? And what should be considered professional when it comes to expressing certain thoughts at work?

Analysis:

Gender has everything to do with the subjects talked about. Since there were usually only women behind the front desk, there was a lot of “girl talk”. Not only did most of this conversation make my mom feel uncomfortable, but if a student, professor, or an administrator was to overhear the conversation, they would not be comfortable or happy with what they should hear. There was something about this type of conversation that was very unprofessional, but why?

This office is a place where the appropriateness of the business world meets the rest of the world. The workers are expected to act a certain way, but often do not. A stark contrast I saw in the office was the way my mom would handle certain conversation compared to the younger women. My mom represented some sort of “old school” way of thought and doing. There are certain attitudes inherent in my mom because of her upbringing. It turns out, I agree with my mom on some level. There are certain roles that men and women fulfill in a professional environment that make their actions more appropriate. For instance, Career Services advises that it is better for females to wear a dress skirt with hose in a professional atmosphere.

Interview:

I learned the most from just talking to my mom. “It doesn’t matter how stupid I am, the dean just wants a pretty face up at the front and I can learn the rest latter.” My mom can talk for hours about how her coworkers need to learn to act more “professional”. When I asked my mom what this meant, she characterized the word by proper dress and proper conversation. “When someone wears a black thong under white pants and bends over all day long, they are being very inappropriate. Women shouldn’t talk about their boyfriends or penis envy. No one needs to hear about those things. The counselors also need to learn not to gossip about students.” My mom also acknowledged that the way people act at work is a function of social class and/or upbringing, “I think that we have different ‘types’ of ladies at work. For example, I would never drink during lunch with my coworkers.” When I explained to my mom that I see male professors from the physics department enjoying a beer with their lunch, my mom responded with, “well, they are men in the physics department. In the business college, we are supposed to stand out.”

I think that my mom interprets appropriateness almost entirely through how females and males fulfill certain traditional roles. I certainly have a more difficult time doing so, but then again, I’m not a part of the Michael F. Price School of Business. Despite the fact that I barely agree with a lot that my mom says over acting professional, I still think that she acts the most appropriate in her office.

Here is an entire waste of an article:

http://www.latimes.com/features/lifestyle/la-ig-arms29-2009mar29,0,747463.story

Blog 8

Belkin’s article seems to ring a few chords in me, and they don’t agree with her.
I hear the argument that women now have more of a “choice” to leave their career and be stay-at-home mothers (of course how much of a “choice” this is depends on race, social class, place of residence etc.) To me, it seemed that Belkin was arguing that women nowadays are lazy about their own careers, because who wants to work if they have to? You know what, I think they are lazy and that is has always been culturally acceptable for women not to work. But you know what else; men would do the same thing.
Culture values the man who provides for his family. Culture values women who are mother figures. Mix those together and trends make sense. Things also make sense if we consider America in the 1600’s to the 1800’s, a time where women really did have designated tasks oriented around housework which were far from what your standard stay-at-home mother would complete nowadays. But I don’t think very many of those women would be considered lazy by Belkin. Belkin is trying to tie in the fact that the feminist movement has made it possible for women to move towards other types of jobs, but they simply are not fulfilling those jobs and are instead using children as an “opt out”. So while many men would do the same thing if they had the option, I still have a hard time siding with the stay-at-home mothers. The article makes its most important point right near the end:

This, I would argue, is why the workplace needs women. Not just because they are 50 percent of the talent pool, but for the very fact that they are more willing to leave than men. That, in turn, makes employers work harder to keep them. It is why the accounting firm Deloitte & Touche has more than doubled the number of employees on flexible work schedules over the past decade and more than quintupled the number of female partners and directors (to 567, from 97) in the same period. It is why I.B.M. employees can request up to 156 weeks of ob-protected family time off. It is why Hamot Medical Center in Erie, Pa., hired a husband and wife to fill one neonatology job, with a shared salary and shared health insurance, then let them decide who stays home and who comes to the hospital on any given day. It is why, everywhere you look, workers are doing their work in untraditional ways.

The other side of the argument that I hear most from Belkin has to do with “choice”. She argues that affluent, white women form Princeton had the ability to choose, while others may not have. I agree. That is why it seems such a disgrace when these women choose not to enter the work force in any way, when countless others would love to, but cannot. I’m sure that this would offend many individuals, but if someone does not express any desire to invest in themselves and realize they have an obligation to give back to society, then they are they people who hold us back from a more sensible society. I should clarify that I don’t define a job entirely by wage. There are countless organizations and causes people can assign themselves to that give some of the greatest contributions to our society.

A pretty funny response to this article can be found on the Salon News website, http://archive.salon.com/mwt/feature/2003/10/27/belkin/. The author, Walsh, attacks one of the weakest points in Belkin’s discussion: the matter of “choice”. Walsh discusses that Belkin really did refuse to discuss matters of discrimination, and she should have. She also discusses that Belkin’s work doesn’t say anything special because of the group of individuals she’s interviewing: “Because, honestly, if you take those disclaimers seriously, you'll think -- correctly -- that Belkin's piece is a real-time snapshot of a small cohort of privileged 30-something white women who are likely to think something entirely different in 10 years.” I agree with Walsh.

Blog 7

Movie Review

The most recent movie I’ve seen lately is “The House of Yes”. A movie with great reviews, but little advertisement and box office attention, “The House of Yes” is a twisted dark comedy. The premise of the story surrounds an off-kilter family consisting of a mother and her three grown children, a son, and a set of twins, one male and one female. The twin son, Marquis, comes home for thanksgiving where his mother, brother and sister live together. Marquis surprises his family with a fiancée. By the point in the movie, you are well aware of his sister’s, Jackie-o, mental illness –she’s insane. (**Don’t read the following section if you want to see the movie –I highly recommend it**) As very confusing and twisted secrets about the family’s history surface during the evening’s events, the viewer slowly learns about the incestuous relationship that has taken place between Marquis and his twin sister, Jackie-o. Marquis’s fiancée learns about their relationship when she catches him having sex with his sister. The fiancée, Leslie, is then manipulated to have sex with the other brother, Anthony. ...believe it or not, the actors pull it off.

Gender is a very interesting part of the story to pick apart, starting with the main character, Jackie-o. Jackie’s insanity is blamed often on her relationship with Marquis. Her mental stability is entirely dependent on Marquis’s acceptance of her. Not only that, but her personality if formed from having everything that she’s ever wanted, she’s extremely spoiled. When the viewer learns more of historical events in Jackie’s life, they learn about her obsessive and manipulative qualities. For example, she shot Markus in the gut so that he wouldn’t be able to leave for school. The most dominant feature of her character is her obsession with Jackie Kennedy. I loved the mix of stereotypes played by this character. She represented the selfish, dependent, and manipulative women in our society.

Marquis is also an interesting character to examine. Every action that he took seemed to be controlled by one of the women, whether is be his fiancée, sister, or mother. He represents another very common stereotype in our society: the man that is only motivated by women.

My favorite character to consider when discussing gender is Anthony. Anthony is the dumb other brother who doesn’t seem sure of much. He plays dumb so well that he has an astounding ability to manipulate women. He lies to Marquis’s fiancée by telling her that he has a brain tumor and is a virgin... a lie that would only work on an easily persuaded woman if played in the perfect stupid way. Anthony allows his true personality to seep through once in the whole movie, and it is after he has fully realized that he has entirely rode out the train of taking advantage of Leslie, the fiancée. Because you only meet the real Anthony for a very short moment while he is a little bitter, the viewer can understand how conniving he really is. Anthony represents what all those “men-haters” out there hate on.

As a whole, gender rolls are the underlying manipulative force that drives all of the relationships in the film. Even obsessions and reasoning for each character are shaped in some way by a gender stereotype.

Readings

Chapter 7 in the “F-Word” reminded me of one of my greatest fears: marriage. Despite the fact that anyone living in Oklahoma would think the normal age to get married is 22 (or earlier), there are many people out there in the real world getting married at slightly less scary ages. One thing the author didn’t mention when talking about the trend of people getting married later is that the meaning of marriage is changing. She talked about many of the factors that have gone into changing the function of marriage, the necessity of marriage, and the changing social pressures to get married, but failed to talk about how this makes for a new type of marriage that can be defined more loosely. How do people know when they should get married if it is starting to become more a choice of whether or not they would like to, not that they should, or need to.

One definition of marriage that I currently really love is: why get married? I don’t think that people need to get married at all. In fact, I think that for certain couples, the comfort of a legal tie to one another fogs the importance of remaining a responsible partner that actively tries to “convince” the other person to still be with them. What is a healthy love if people forget why they are in the relationship other than by remembering warm feelings from distant memories? If people choose to stay together without marriage, it seems as though they may be motivated to invest more in the relationship. ...I’m a little anti-marriage right now.

Something to care about

Get involved in a solution:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltan
http://www.womenforwomen.org/
http://www.store-vday.org/

Blog 6

Gap Advertisement for “RED”
So I’ll give it to Gap, they are doing a great job raising money for AIDS awareness and treatment. Personally, I can’t see where AIDS plays a roll in the advertisement. I guess they do a good job at making the remains of a shirt on her look really lucky and really cool. Gap also does a great job at displaying our modern, beautiful, natural, woman model. She’s a healthy weight –barely. She has such healthy skin –with makeup and Photoshop all over it. Her face is so natural –made to look flawless like a doll. Her hair is messy –it’s perfectly out of place. Her breasts look, well, right at you. Her pants, well, are missing. The yoga pose is also very appropriate in a time where we all know that yoga isn’t westernized. What does this image say about gender? ...that a good pair looks at you with greater intent than a lifeless doll face ...that spaghetti arms are nice accessories to that good cause tank top ...that lifeless features will work well with that cranberry color ...that Photoshop body parts enhance the nice neckline of the top. I have learned that in order to pull of that top, all women had better not forget to fix themselves up to look like her.

Wolf:
“We are in the midst of a violent backlash against feminism that uses images of female beauty as a political weapon against women’s advancement: the beauty myth. The beauty myth took the place of domesticity.”
I disagree that the beauty myth is a political weapon against women’s advancement. Women still have the choice to disagree with the countless images placed in front of them constantly. I wish that the focus of what confines women to certain appearances and ways of acting was fighting against the lack of education of young people in North America. I believe that the real issue surrounding the beauty myth is what will make money. Sex really does sell –and there are thousands of reasons why. If everyone knows this, why is it so hard for parents and roll models to teach children that images portrayed in advertisements are lies?
It’s a parent’s job to make sure that they raise a child that understands what a real woman is rather than relying on society and television to instill those values for them. We live in a society were women who are properly educated have the chance to understand that images that tell them who they should be and what they should look like do not carry valuable truths. When women and men are not properly educated, it is the fault irresponsible parents, teachers, roll models, etc. It comes from mothers and fathers assuming certain “appropriate” roles in raising their children... roles that do not overlap and that are responsible for teaching only what young people should not do... never what to think over, never what to aspire to be, never that what children are given is the chance to rise above all of the negative confinement that is obvious in our society. There is a reason that men are taught to think certain body types are attractive. There is a reason that women are taught to learn from images like the ones the author claims forms the beauty myth. The people responsible for raising girls and boys, women and men, are not properly educated about these issues.

Scott:
I completely agree with the author’s thesis. I agree with the author because of certain experiences that I have had being a woman in this society.
First, I don’t completely reject my culture. This culture has its flaws, but I still choose to be a part of it... I enjoy being a woman in North America. Our society as a whole has a very, very loose definition of what it means to be a woman. Why? Regardless of stereotypes, no one seamlessly agrees on what a true woman or a true man is in our culture. We still have expectations in our society of what gender is that often are never questioned, for example, “women should shave their legs”. There are very few women who flaunt unshaven legs. So while I disagree with the majority of these unspoken expectations, I still like enjoy being a female in this culture. I enjoy the opportunity to have an education, to succeed in a field of study, to disagree openly about controversial subjects, and to have laws that protect me; all are fairly unique to our culture. I enjoy taking pride in the clothing I wear, I enjoy doing my hair, and I enjoy wearing makeup sometimes, and on top of all of that, I still believe in equal rights for women.
Another reason that I agree with the author’s thesis is that there are women of all types that need to be reached with the message of feminism. There are certain type of women that will not respond, or will simply reject a message from a woman that doesn’t look like a “normal” woman in our society. I think it’s very beneficial to the movement if women presented in all forms are able to get the message out.