By Kevin Hershey, Guest Commentary
Chile, where I am currently studying, is a nation dominated by machismo culture. One look at a map will show you that Chile forms a phallus to whhich no other country can compare. From the deserts in the north to the fiery volcanoes of the south, from the snowy peaks of the Andes to the crashing waves of the Pacific, male dominance rings loud and proud. For this reason, the article "Where has all the chivalry gone?" in last week's online issue of the Beacon particularly caught my eye.
My impression of the article is that it was meant to criticize the typical college male. While the author did point out some all-too-true faults of my sex (perhaps a well-deserved smack in the face), she succeeded much more stunningly in smacking her own sex in the face twice as hard. Of course I realize that as a male I cannot defend womankind as effectively as my female peers, but I will do my best.
The author of this article's principle complaint seems to be the lack of action that men take to invite women on dates and give them a good time. A reasonable grievance perhaps, but she seems to be operating under the assumption that women are creatures of inaction, incapable of communication or creativity.
Never once does she suggest a woman can invite a man on a date, has the ability to drive, or even the sense to speak with her romantic partner about her unsatisfactory dating experience. This article presents women as unbelievably passive and completely unintelligent.
I suppose I should not be surprised by this perception of womankind, seeing as the article closes with a quote from "Snow White," a character made popular only about a decade after women earned the right to vote. I marvel at the fact that a fictional personality, who has the voice of a five-year-old child and cannot survive a walk through the forest without passing out, can be used as a quotable source. Poor Snow White was the product of a much different time period; she was probably illiterate and had no way to lift herself out of servitude than to marry a wealthy man. In the past few centuries, however, countless women and men have fought to change this unfortunate circumstance and give women independence, self-sufficiency and education. I therefore see no reason as to why the author, who was accepted to the University of Portland for her personal capabilities, would suggest that she is incapable of opening a car door.
Of course, it is always nice to pay for a meal or buy a ticket regardless of gender. The author of "Where has all the chivalry gone?" implies that a woman is almost something to be purchased. The custom of men paying for women comes from a bygone era in which a woman was considered a man's "chattel" and he must provide for her, just as he provided for his chickens, cows, and slaves. In a day and age in which women are now active in the workforce, are their earnings not to be spent?
Furthermore, paying in relationships has its own price. It creates an uneven power dynamic between woman and man, a system of debt much more like that between child and parent. My parents pay for my education and food, thus I follow their rules. If a husband pays for the meals and activities of his wife, it is often not exactly a freebie. He pays to support her; she makes the food, cleans the house, bears and raises his children and satisfies his sexual desires on command.
In her description of "girl's nights," the author implies that like Snow White, a woman without a man is somewhat of a brainless and hopeless being void of creativity or activity. It mystifies me that educated and privileged women like those who attend University of Portland would feel the need to turn to unhealthy eating habits, reclusiveness, and low-quality films when left to their own devices.
Portland is a city full of restaurants, parks, clubs, museums, theaters, non-profits, libraries, historic sites, etc., none of which require a penis to utilize. The author fails to acknowledge the fact that females can indeed venture into the public sphere unaccompanied by a male in our land of the free. Perhaps she is confusing the Obama administration with the Taliban.
Finally, I would like to point out that this article is written from a completely heteronormative perspective that may leave any homosexual reader confused. If two men go on a date, how are they to behave? Should they beat each other up to determine who gets to pay the bill? Should they take turns opening care doors for one another? Perhaps the only thing worse would be a lesbian relationship. Since the article suggests that women are incapable of asking someone on a date, the poor lesbians seem to have no hope of ever going out. Even if they do manage to reach the dating stage, they may risk being trapped inside the car all evening as neither would be able to open the door. Perhaps the one with the shorter hair or deeper voice would ultimately grow a pair of "balls" and take the initiative.
I will conclude in saying that reading last week´s Beacon made me a little nervous about my return to U.S. university life. In Chile, university is seen as an opportunity to grow and learn, a privilege especially for the nation's traditionally undereducated women. Apparently, the university in the U.S. is viewed as more of a singles club. Perhaps the author of "Where has all the chivalry gone?" would be well advised to pay the $17.99 Match.com fee rather than the $30,000 plus UP tuition. She would be post welcome in Chile as well, where she would have about a 30 precent chance of experiencing family violence and only about a 38 percent chance of participating in the workforce, in which she would be paid significantly less than an average man.
However, she would likely be asked on countless dates and wooed by guitar-strumming, Spanish-speaking men without having to open a door or her wallet.
Kevin Hershey is a junior Spanish studies major and can be contacted at hershey12@up.edu.
