A Brief Treatise
It always shocks me when I find people who are perfectly happy playing the role that is expected of them. The four guys in my classes had no real beef with potentially being the ones automatically expected to break up fights. This boggles me.
Now, don't misunderstand. I'm not scared for their potential injuries. I'd volunteer myself and fully intend to be the teacher whose reputation Alone would stop a fight. But to be on The List just because they are men, their character, mannerism, affect totally not with standing ... I don't know; there is something wrong there.
And don't doubt that there is a list. When the principal, vice principal, and counselor are off campus, the male teachers are next to be called. The fact that they completely swallow this, as if it were their birth right along with their penis, bothers me. The Y gene does not directly translate into violence and shouldn't be blindly seen (can you say that??) that way.
One of these guys is very quiet and gentle, and I'd put money on my chances over him any day. And yet, he would be called. I'm offended! But how come they aren't offended? The school, the teachers, we, everyone is implying that they will "know what to do," that they have experience with "that sort of thing," that their "maleness" is some how more frightening than my "femaleness." This is the fundamental problem between the status que and a sexually equal society. We continue to think this way and justify it. I bet you've already come up with three "Yeah, but..." statements while you were reading this.
Could it be that we still accept that men are just naturally violent. Then we are saying they are all destructive, harmful, and dangerous! Could my gentle friend secretly (and perhaps subconsciously) enjoy the confidence the school is putting in his potential ability to be and handle violence? Because this is what we want in our men? Because this is what we expect? You know what they say about expectations.
We are setting men up to fail.
Damn it. I want a column.
Now, don't misunderstand. I'm not scared for their potential injuries. I'd volunteer myself and fully intend to be the teacher whose reputation Alone would stop a fight. But to be on The List just because they are men, their character, mannerism, affect totally not with standing ... I don't know; there is something wrong there.
And don't doubt that there is a list. When the principal, vice principal, and counselor are off campus, the male teachers are next to be called. The fact that they completely swallow this, as if it were their birth right along with their penis, bothers me. The Y gene does not directly translate into violence and shouldn't be blindly seen (can you say that??) that way.
One of these guys is very quiet and gentle, and I'd put money on my chances over him any day. And yet, he would be called. I'm offended! But how come they aren't offended? The school, the teachers, we, everyone is implying that they will "know what to do," that they have experience with "that sort of thing," that their "maleness" is some how more frightening than my "femaleness." This is the fundamental problem between the status que and a sexually equal society. We continue to think this way and justify it. I bet you've already come up with three "Yeah, but..." statements while you were reading this.
Could it be that we still accept that men are just naturally violent. Then we are saying they are all destructive, harmful, and dangerous! Could my gentle friend secretly (and perhaps subconsciously) enjoy the confidence the school is putting in his potential ability to be and handle violence? Because this is what we want in our men? Because this is what we expect? You know what they say about expectations.
We are setting men up to fail.
Damn it. I want a column.