Talk Amongst Yourselves

I will give you a topic!!

Rhode Island is neither a "road" nor an "Island."

Discuss!!

This is the story of my life.  Making sense of is all while using pop culture colloquialisms.  I tend to use Sex and the City, Golden Girls, John Landis movies, and Saturday Night Live to fill in the blanks when I need to make an analogy.  Sometimes, I use my own life, as my mother, grandmother, and father can usually provide some fodder for figuring out the ambiguities of life.

Because of the in-your-face nature of popular culture, women's emotions are put on display quite a bit.  Like "crying at a Hallmark commercial" as an example of women being "emotional" because of that "time of the month" or whatever.  Feh. But I've become cognizant of that perception, and maybe I can poke fun at myself because of it.  No, I won't cry during commercials.  But I do cry during movies.

I can mock cry at situations that actually do mean a lot to me.  Once, my mother and I were watching a Behind the Music featuring Cher, and we both started tearing up at Cher's eulogizing of Sonny Bono.  Something so silly, that doesn't affect either of us in real life. 

Yet, I can sometimes compartmentalize my feelings on situations, to make them funny.  This may be a defense mechanism.  But when I was out celebrating our mutual birthdays with Dee, her mother (a woman I affectionately refer to as my "aunt") said that she looked on me like a daughter.

And I got verklempt.  The Yiddish substitute for "emotional" that Linda Richman, character made famous by actor Mike Myers, that I like to say from time-to-time.  Okay.  I say it a LOT.  I like to say it because in happy situations, even if you want to cry tears of joy, it's all silly.  I like to keep life light.  So even if there is a reason to be emotional, it shouldn't be too overwhelming.  By saying something in Yiddish, I can deflect a lot of it, but still get the point across that it means a lot. 

Why do I get "verklempt" to begin with?  Sometimes, I get overwhelmed with the bigger picture.  I know there is a world that's a lot bigger than me, but I can only just take care of me and those closest to me.  I've been around for over 30 years, but people come into my life whom I thought I got along without just fine until I met them.  Post-It Notes were a "happy accident" by 3M.  My "happy accident" was meeting Dee and her mother.

I don't want to trivialize our relationship by calling it a post-it, but it is truly special and unique.  It's something that even at times that I do get really verklempt about things, it's something that can make me smile.  Which gets me even MORE verklempt.   

That gets me back to the reality that maybe women are more emotional creatures, maybe bigger picture things can hit us harder because we might be more conscience of the idea that we're just little specks on Earth, really. 

But in our universe, these specks can be huge to those of us who are the world to us. 

From Day One, we know our families.  We consider ourselves lucky if we are born into a cool one.  They help craft a lot of our humor and our overall personality.  Every day after, we use that and go around in life making our own family, taking existential pieces and making an authentic existence.  The family you choose is something that you have control over, and it's essential to find people who get the real you.

As Carrie Bradshaw said in the last episode of Sex and the City, "If you can find someone who loves the you YOU love, then, that's just fabulous."  I'm lucky enough to have found those people in my life.

Now, isn't this just like buttah??  Discuss!

Pass The Beer Nuts

"Women...Can't live with 'em, pass the beer nuts!" - Norm Peterson, Cheers

Websites are devoted to the wisdom and wit of the character that was made famous by actor George Wendt.  Yet, I remember the first time I heard that quote about beer nuts and women, and I was confused.  Wasn't the saying supposed to be, "Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em!"  Norm's situation with his wife Vera was one of convenience it was evident on the show.  After all Vera worked for a living, and Norm was constantly between jobs and hung out at a bar all day (with a large tab at that).  It was Norm, really, who was probably difficult to live with.  

There might have been a kernel of truth with Norm's insight.  Understanding female relationships and complexities is something that television, pop culture, and psychologists have analyzed to many ends, often concluding with more open-ended questions. I've even tried to analyze here the battle that women wage with each other and themselves in an effort of understanding.  It seems as though the greatest mystery of the world isn't the Chicken or the Egg or the riddle of the Sphinx. 

No, it's understanding women.

Here's the thing: women are complex.  There's no one way we live our lives.  We rule by our emotions, and perhaps maybe make more decisions of the heart or by consensus, rather than cold, calculated moves.  Yet, when women are "cold and calculated," they are known as "ice queens."  When men are business-like and driven, they are just being "men." Having worked in fast-paced corporate environment, I've seen all those stereotypes in play, and I have to admit, I might be just as guilty stereotyping myself. 

I was reading an article on Forbes the other day about working women myths.  I had to laugh because while I've borne witness to most of these, fact is because women are so multifaceted -- we can be mothers, sisters, daughters, wives, caretakers, taskers, gatherers, etc -- that it's hard to pigeonhole us.

And boy, does that piss people off.   

Women can't show emotion at work because they will be classified as too high strung and therefore, are a breakdown away from going on long-term medical leave.  Yet, if they don't show emotion, they are trying too hard to be like men.  How can it be both ways? 

Business is treated as a boys club in some industries.  So women have to wear two hats: be one of the "boys" and still try to play peacemaker in whatever deal they are trying to work out.  I remember Samantha Jones in Sex and the City, when she was trying to broker a deal being the head of PR for a chain of hotels.  The man she had to pitch her business to suggested she work with someone else -- a man -- because he didn't think she could handle the work herself.  Later, he told her he wouldn't hire because she slept with his architect.  How did a woman's sex life get involved in a hiring decision?  When she told him if she were a man, they'd be celebrating over martinis.  After she stormed out, he hired her for admiring her "balls."  How about, not apologizing for herself and standing her ground because she knew she was best for the job?  Of course, this was all fictionalized, but you see my point.  It makes me wonder how many women might be turned down for pitched business because of their outside reputation.

Think about it: women are vilified when they are not flowery pieces of sunshine, being refreshed and wholesome when their husbands come home for the day.  Being a woman, I think that a male-dominated society will only be happy when we are back IN the kitchen, because then...they've figured us out! And by "they," I mean society.  Men aren't just hard on women, women are equally hard on our own gender, as I illustrated several months ago.  Hell, I went to an all-women's college and I'm still trying to figure us out! And by "us," I mean "me!"

You may get the idea that I'm some kind of angry female writer, but I'm really not.  I am very proud to be a woman.  I may write stuff to figure things out for me, but at the root of it all, I think it's great that women are complex creatures and have the ability to multitask and make decisions thoughtfully.  In fact, I attended a Women on Wall Street event where a woman who owned one of the first women-owned-and-operated trading exchange said, "The financial crisis in 2008 would not have happened if women were making the decisions."  I thought it was very telling that a woman in her late 70s would say that, especially one so close to the industry.  Just an example of something that I remember the difference in women and business. 

Fifty-plus years since the feminist revolution, it's still quite a radical notion that women can conduct business, be mothers, be wives, write about sports or music, operate a vehicle, cook meals, and the list can go on and on.  Norm Peterson may have preferred beer nuts to living with his wife. Perhaps he should have invited her to Cheers a few times and try to understand her.  But then again, she was too busy working, running the household and fixing her car to go out with him anyway.

Things Dr. Roman Taught Me

Being an opinionated, intelligent and articulate woman, even in this day and age, is not something that's encouraged. I have a feeling that a lot of this is due to generational shifts where it was presumed that women had a place and a slot to belong to in society.

I suppose that some people didn’t get the memo that the Constitution was actually amended once upon a time to protect the rights of women. But I digress.

I went to an all-women’s college, and the underlying theme of feminism was prominent along with leadership roles of women. Around the time I started, there was a study that identified a weakness of girls in math and sciences, and that boys were typically pushed to go into those careers. I thought it was hogwash, but then again, I was in an all-women’s college. To me, there was no question of who was a leader. We were encouraged to speak up and debate and have it be healthy and energizing and supportive as well. As with human nature, it didn’t always go like that, but I did manage to enter the work force as a confident young woman who was not afraid to speak up or keep up with the boys (which I later did see first-hand in investment banking, but I’ll get to that later).

Dr. Roman was one of my English literature professors, and a common theme in many of the works she chose were women-focused, such as reading Charlotte Bronte, the Odyssey but focusing on Penelope’s role while Odysseus was out nailing the sirens while on the open seas, and having a better understanding of mythology in popular culture. Yet, I’ll never forget when a young woman in class made sort of a bitter comment about feminism, and said, “I don’t know what woman had the idea to open her big mouth. But I would have been perfectly happy staying at home and taking care of the house.”

To which Dr. Roman looked at all of us, shook her head solemnly and said, “Oh no.” The response got a laugh from the classroom. She told us that feminism wasn’t just about staying at home or working full-time or choosing a career over family or vice versa (though again, I will point out, I’ve seen that happen in the working world). No, she told us, feminism was that women could be whatever or whoever they wanted to be. So contrary to popular belief, if a woman wanted to be a stay-at-home mom, or wanted to have an outside career, she did not need to be penalized for it by other women. In fact, feminism made that choice possible.

I never forgot that.

Yet, I see the struggle first-hand with women against women, especially in social media settings. It’s made people more vocal with a larger soapbox from which to preach, but also has an underlying notion of negativity and even violence infiltrating these threads.

I think about how Dr. Roman defined feminism, and it’s something I hold to a high standard of how I conduct myself. Yes, it makes me angry when I see a perfectly able woman go on maternity leave, and then come back to find her job chopped up between three analysts, just so in a few months they can let her go. It makes me upset when a woman with an opinion who may be running for public office is accused of being “too male,” and yet when she displays emotion, “isn’t ‘fit’ to be President” or whatever office she may be running for. It’s a double-standard, and yet, most women do the same things themselves within their own population.

I’ve had my own problems with differing views of feminism, those contrary to my own. I guess when I see a woman working at H00ters or Hawaiian Tropic Zone, I see two things going on: one is that these women are adults and if they want to flaunt themselves to make a buck, more power to them. The other is that they are kind of exploiting men with bank accounts who spend a lot of money objectifying women. Yes, I could get upset about the objectification. But on the flip side, if these women were not drugged or exploited to do get jobs there, I see no problem with it. Plus, these places also hire men, so it’s not an issue to me.

Yet, I’ve been called out for not being “feminist enough” for simply disagreeing with viewpoints of what feminism could and should be. I’ve been harassed because I pick and choose my battles as far as women’s rights go. In an ideal world, of course I’d like to see women on an identical pay scale for men in equivalent roles and no glass ceilings. I’d also like to see women not be penalized by their own gender and the male aristocracy for taking time off to be with their families or wanting to balance their work-family. I don’t see anyone calling men out for taking time to be with their children when they are little.

It’s only become more prominent with social media tools such as Twitter. In fact, I was recently chastised by someone I considered a very good friend of mine outside of these forums, because she felt I was not taking her side enough in little Twitter wars. Yet, someone who is a proponent of free speech is penalizing me for simply not keeping up with whoever is her enemy this week, I felt this was a cop out for simply feeling under attack. I also have it on authority that she took this behavior with other mutual friends. Let me just state that this was not an isolated incident. It was cold and calculated.

It’s just Twitter, sure, but at the end of the day, if this person is cognizant of my social interactions in an open forum that’s free for anyone, chances are they are disapproving of my social interactions outside of them as well. And if I need to censor myself for fear of being attacked by this person, that kind of takes the fun out of these forums, right?

But at the root of it, I feel as though women are under attack by other women and if they are not immediately on their side, it’s seen as a liability. It’s only then I take solace in the words that Dr. Roman spoke about that day in class, when she enlightened by saying that women could be or do anything they wanted to be.

And isn’t that the very definition of feminism?

Empowerment In the Meantime

First I was afraid, I was petrified. Kept thinking I could never live without you by my side. But I spent so many nights, thinking how you did me wrong. I grew strong. I learned how to carry on. - Gloria Gaynor, I Will Survive

I may have sounded like a romantic cynic last week when I did my Valentine's Day piece, or more apt my anti-Valentine's Day piece. It couldn't be further from the truth: I not only believe that romance is still alive and well, but I also believe in true love. I found my true love when I least expected it. The difference between me and most romantic cynics is that I empowered myself to ask, believe and receive. And yes, if that sounds like The Secret mantra, then you would be correct in that assumption.

What I'm writing about today is that I have become concerned about the cynicism and sense of hopelessness from some of my sisters in the love department. And I'd like to empower them in this moment and say that love is out there for all of you, if you want it.

I was once not fully open. I had gotten out of a miserable seven year relationship where we stayed on autopilot for about half those years. I remember someone once saying that it's funny how long we put up with "just okay" because we are comfortable. But what was funny with me was that I knew I didn't love him; I was just okay with it because of what I knew about relationships. They were supposed to be functional; not fun or making yourself better. That's what I've learned about relationships: they are supposed to enhance YOU and not make you a bitter and angry person. That was what I was.

What was more was that after that relationship ended, I felt like I was open to other relationships that could better me, but I still fell into old habits. Former Oprah Winfrey consultant Iyanla Vanzant said that when she left Harpo Productions, and started her own talk show with another company, she said she had a history of falling into relationships with people who treated her badly. When she said that, I felt that connection very deeply. I have been a devout believer in manifesting my feelings, energy and my thoughts into reality. And yet, I fell into similar emotionally unavailable traps with intimate relationships, even friendships.

I dated a few people after that significant relationship ended and prior to me meeting my husband. There were two "biggies" that I refer to in helping my girlfriends out in their relationships that I use as parables and anecdotes to try to help them in knowing that true love is out there for them.

One was a guy who I had an on-and-off, and off-and-on, and on-and-off, then off for a little while, then on-and-off again till I basically met my husband. In his views, we were friends. But here's the thing: we weren't friends. Hell, I'm not even sure we liked each other as people. And yet, I stuck around because I was "in the meantime," as Iyanla would say. "In the meantime" is seen as the period between relationships to help women and men avoid repeating unproductive behaviors of the past.

Another significant person I dated I justified that he fit the "profile." He was smart, handsome, had a good job. He treated me well by taking me out and giving into my ideas for fun. Of course, the story goes when I started to "pressure" him into a more "real" relationship, he shut down. See, when it was all fun and games, the relationship was worth being in. He used the excuse that he was going through a divorce, and yet I lied to myself and went against every single girl's bible He's Just Not That Into You excuses: he'll change and see I'm the one for him. Yet, even when I saw his true colors -- shallow, insecure and disrespectful -- I still made excuses? And you know why? Because I wasn't sure when love was going to knock on my door. That was how desperate I was for love.

Even when he disappeared, returned, and tried to get back in my good graces, I was angry. PISSED OFF. And I still gave him the benefit of the doubt. I remember talking to my friend about it over drinks. Then I smiled to myself, and she asked, "What is it?" I said, "Wow, I realized just how desperate I just sounded." After that, I stopped. I even had lost a few friends in the meantime, but they were mostly toxic relationships or relationships that neither of us really had to offer one another. So my question is: why do we stay in these relationships for too long? Iyanla says it keeps us occupied. It gives us drama. But drama begats drama. And sometimes, the drama simply isn't worth it.

And it's when you least expect it, when you get rid of toxic relationships all around you, be it friendship or love, you will open yourself to being in the relationships you deserve to be in.

So when I see my girlfriends repeating these bad behaviors for themselves, and excusing bad behaviors of others for their own purposes, it makes me so sad. Because I know these fabulous women deserve better for themselves and should be using these lessons as empowerment in life. Once you empower yourself in romance, you will open yourself up to the life you deserve and crave.

So what will it be? Drama? Or happiness? Empower yourself today!

Battle of the Sex

View from the Coop

If you ever watched the show Sex and the City or even Golden Girls, you would assume that all women have tight-knit relationships. Save the occasional "blow out," or even minor disagreement, you would assume that a woman's worst enemy was men, specifically those who have broken their hearts. In the end, the girls always had each other's back.

Then you read books like Odd Girl Out, specifically about the hidden aggression in girls (and subsequently women) and you know that usually the opposite happens. We hear about the "Battle of the Sexes" so often that we truly believe that Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus, when the reality is, we are all earthlings, so deal with it.

Men and women have their differences, of course. I just find it mind boggling that women have it out for each other. When I read Odd Girl Out several years ago, I cried because I had lived it. Turns out Dee did too. As kids we were bullied and picked on during school. There is a distinct difference between girls bullying and boys bullying. Girls are more emotional, they know how to get to you. As we get older, it becomes less trivial, but I find that women still have a way of "getting" to one another. It may not resort to physical nature, but boy it digs deep.

One of the biggest arguments we hear as adults about women and families. "Women should stay home with their children" or "women who work shouldn't have children or put their children in day care." Who the hell are people to judge other women's lifestyles and choices?

Dee's mom, whom I refer to affectionately as my "aunt," managed their household. My mother stayed home during my younger years, but was an exception to the rule in working her way up (with no college degree, by the way). She always worked close by, for sure, but even today, the unspoken in Corporate America is that many women take pay cuts or demotions when they leave to tend to their families or are punished for the so-called work/life balance.

Yet the backlash I think that occurs is that your children will be messed up or lacking in values if the mom doesn't stay home. On the other hand, I know plenty of kids where a parent may have stayed at home and are messed up too. There's no distinct formula.

Needless to say, Dee and I are both heavy into recreational drugs and complete degenerates of society. I kid, I kid. My point is, you can't judge other women's decisions for what is best for THEIR family. If you want to stay home to raise your family, good. If you want to work and balance that life, good too. It's a personal decision that should not be judged by anyone else. Nothing is gained from this behavior, especially when we are all trying to do the right things with our families.

I can't help but think this is some kind of competitive back from the days-of-the-cave where women were the gatherers, and they could only show how well their families were by the size of the buffalo carcass their cavemen brought home. It's all about status. And it pisses me off.

Even women who are experts in their respective fields have minor digs at other women, and their life choices. A common occurrence in today's world is that women will put off childbearing in order to be financially stable (and you know, have insurance, etc) household. A study came out about the stresses linked to this, and I don't doubt it. I mean, it's gotta be stressful at any time of your life, right? However, there are trappings in managing a household with dual incomes, and wanting to provide a comfortable lifestyle for your family as well.

So it's a balance, but I had to laugh when I read the following line in the article. Barbara Schneider, who is a sociology professor at Michigan State, poses a question about "why so many mothers work full time if that makes them more stressed and means less time to be with their children?" I guess my question is does it really matter?

Not for nothing, Schneider is just as guilty in making women specifically feel bad for working outside the home AND raising a family. Why isn't more being asked of the men in the household? Why aren't we asking more of a social responsibility of others and workplaces to make accommodations for working families (of course without putting out those who are single and don't have families).

And most importantly, why are women giving a damn about how other women handle their households? It's none of their freaking business!! Look, I'm married. I have two cats. That's the extent of my responsibility right now. I have good benefits, a retirement package and insurance. My husband...not so much. Chances are, we will both have to keep working if we choose to start a family with kids that don't have four legs and fur. And you know what? That's will be my freaking decision. And if one of us stays home, again it's a very personal decision that shouldn't be judged by other women, whatever their lifestyle choices lead them.

That's What Dee Said

I didn't realize how much Coop and I had in common until we did this piece together. Yes, we are both only children. Yes, we were both bullied in school. Yes, our moms stayed home to raise us for the majority of our childhood years. And while we may have many similarities, then and now, we have still grown up to be our own individual and unique person, different from each other as well. As mutual friend Fred "Solly" Solomon said to me yesterday, we each bring something different to the table. Which goes to show you that not everything we discuss in this piece will pertain to everyone reading it. There are exceptions to every rule, truly making life unpredictable and exciting. Our word is not law; it is simply honest observations based on experience.

I have met many women over the years who absolutely refuse to be friends with other women. Sure, they have female "acquaintances" and co-worker relationships. But when it comes to real, close, whole-hearted friends, they choose men over other women. Their reasons are simple; their intentions are not malicious. They feel women are too jealous and catty (and we can be at times) and don't want to be hurt. But if and when you find that true friend, you won't have to worry about those things. No one is saying you need to have tons of girl friends. I don't. I have two or three best friends and that's all I need. Besides, can men and women really be friends anyway? Isn't there always one party involved that ends up having feelings for the other that aren't felt in return?

Another gender battle takes place when it comes to our sexuality. I guess you can say this is literally a battle of the sex. Why is it that the more partners a male has, the more of a "stud" he is? But when it comes to women, we should remain wholesome and pure? Who said a man's needs are more important than a woman's? I don't think that's exactly equal rights, but no matter how far our society has come -- or how much men expect of the women they're just having a good time with -- they still want that "good girl" as their wife.

Then there is the single mom debate. Many women are now intentionally choosing to have children -- whether via adoption or biologically -- in order to fill the void in their life of not being a parent. I happen to be one of these women. Though I have not gone through the process and may not be financially ready to do so just yet, I agree with these women 100%. Just because they haven't found Mr. Right (or maybe don't want to), does that mean they should be deprived the opportunity to be a mother, a true gift in this life?

What works for one woman, may not work for another. But it's not for us to point fingers and judge anyone else. Too many times I've come into contact with people who were only my friend when they agreed with me. That's not how it works.

Hmmm, maybe it is best to only have male friends...

From the Coop again:

We are all guilty of it, judging others and forming an opinion, when we have no idea what goes on behind closed doors. And I think that women judging other women, harshly I might add, does not promote the ideals of feminism. And feminism was all about CHOICE.