Why My Son Bobby Needs Feminism Too

Last updated on: January 2, 2013 at 5:25 am by Libby Anne

Why My Son Bobby Needs Feminism Too 2012-12-29T17:23:04-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I’ve noticed something as the mother of two children, one daughter and one son. I can dress my preschool daughter in girls’ clothes or in boys’ clothes, but if I dressed my baby in purple or put him in a dress, well, I’d get some serious stares.

We often say that “patriarchy hurts men too.” It’s true. For example, I grew up in a community where boys were expected to grow up to be providers and girls were expected to grow up to be homemakers. Girls didn’t have any options, but boys’ options were curtailed too – they were pushed toward careers that would make enough money to support a wife and multiple children, and away from careers in the arts that were seen as less financially sure. Patriarchy makes women’s only option homemaking while allowing men to choose from a variety of career paths, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t also limit men’s options.

And patriarchy limits other things too. If I took time off of my career to focus on my children, that wouldn’t be seen as odd. If my husband did the same, he would face questions. Women are encouraged to express their emotions, but men are expected to be strong. It is seen as natural for a woman to cry in a stressful situation, but men who cry are seen as weak. Of course, there is the flip side of each of these: men benefit from being seen as strong, and while a woman taking time off from her career is more accepted the result on a wider scale is that the “mommy track” contributes to the pay gap between men and women.

Men are expected to follow the one option that is generally valued most highly in our society – to have a full time career, to keep their family name, to be tough and strong. But that doesn’t change the fact that if they choose other, less valued options – staying home with their children, changing their name upon marriage, or being sensitive and emotive – they face questions and possible ridicule. Sally is allowed to do girl things or boy things, but Bobby is expected to just do boy things. Sally is allowed to be either sensitive or tough, or even both at once, but Bobby is expected to simply be tough.

While we still have conversations about how hard it is for women to “do it all,” I don’t think we can achieve true equality unless we expect men to “do it all” too. In other words, reaching equality means more than just girls adding trucks to their repertoire of toys. It also means boys adding dolls to their repertoire as well. Reaching equality doesn’t just mean finding ways for women to both parent and have careers but also asking men to both have careers and parent as well. Reaching equality doesn’t simply mean giving women the option to work rather than stay home with their children but rather offering men the same option as well, and with the same expectations and acceptance.

We talk a lot about the pay gap. Well, it strikes me that if a manager has the choice between promoting a man or a woman, and he knows that there is a decent chance that sometime in the next few years the woman may have children and at the very least have to take maternity leave, but that the man’s performance and presence will not be affected if he has children, then the rational choice is for him to promote the man. Because of this, I don’t think we can get rid of the pay gap until we expect fathers to invest the same amount of time and energy into parenting that we expect mothers to invest in parenting. If that same manager looks at the man and the woman knowing that if either has a child their performance and presence will be impacted the same way – parental leave after the birth, and perhaps a need for more flexible hours afterwards – he will no longer have any reason to prefer the man to the woman when it comes to a promotion.

I am not trying to minimize the negative impact patriarchy has had on women. In the past, women have ceased to exist legally at marriage, and in many societies children have functioned as their father’s property. Patriarchy has always meant that women have had less power and men have had more, but patriarchy has also always been about roles. Women have specific roles and men have specific roles. We’ve made good progress breaking down women’s role and giving women a greater array of choices, but the truth is that we also need to break down men’s role.

Fortunately, we are already seeing progress on this front. The number of stay at home dads is growing, and fathers are increasingly expected to be just as involved in parenting as mothers are, or at the very least, more involved than in the past. There is more acceptance for boys breaking through gender norms by wearing female clothing or playing with female toys. But we still have a long, long way to go.

In discussing both feminism and the reaction against feminism, Melissa of Permission to Live wrote the following:

Somehow society has become convinced that there is a right way and a wrong way to be the sex you are. Boys are told to toughen up and quit crying, girls are showered with messages about how their value is tied to their beauty (as defined by the surrounding culture). These are just a few examples of the stereotypes that have been around for some time in the western world. While men are still largely stuck in the role created for them, recently there has been some effort to fight back on behalf of women. But instead of seeing this as a good thing, and doing the rest of the work to debunk these stereotypes, many people see this as a major step back.

As Melissa says, we need to go the rest of the way and debunk all of the stereotypes. Girls need to be encouraged to be tough as well as sensitive, yes, but boys also need to be encouraged to be sensitive as well as tough. We’ve taught girls that it’s okay to be like boys. Now we need to teach boys that it’s okay to be like girls. Liberating women from the restriction of female gender roles without liberating men from the restriction of male gender roles is a one-sided revolution that can never be completed.

As I see it, feminism is about breaking down patriarchy, and that means smashing the box patriarchy puts men in every bit as much as it means smashing the box patriarchy puts women in. It doesn’t matter whether one box was roomier or more comfortable to begin with. Both restrict and both need to be done away with.

I look at Sally and I look at Bobby and I know that the world still has different expectations of the two of them simply because of their gender, and completely irrespective of their talents, passions, and abilities. The world I want is a world where both of them have the same choices, receive the same reaction, and face the same expectations. I want a world where people are seen as people first, rather than immediately typed by their gender. I want a world without boxes, a world where we are all just individuals.

We’ve (mostly) liberated women from the restrictive gender roles of the past. It’s time men were liberated too. Feminism isn’t just for Sally. It’s for Bobby too.

Previous Post

January 1, 2013

New Year's Resolutions Anyone?

Next Post

January 2, 2013 "I Make More Money Than He Does"

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How tall was Goliath according to the Bible?

Select your answer to see how you score.

About 9 feet 9 inches About 6 feet 5 inches About 8 feet About 10 feet 5 inches