I saw a stereotype

Context
I was perusing my library's catalog again, and this time I came across a book called Are All Guys Assholes?, by Amber Madison. It's described as an effort to answer this particular question by asking guys themselves about their behavior and attitudes.

Commentary
Please understand, looking over catalog entries is part of my job. I don't just troll around looking for blog material. Besides, this book actually looks like something I might read, if only because I'm fascinated by how people see themselves and others.

That being said, I'll ask this: is sexism the prejudice that just won't die? Most of the people I know wouldn't dream of lumping all African-Americans, all homosexuals or all Muslims into one category, but they will cheerfully say all men are obsessed with sex and all women are obsessed with shoes.

I think our sexuality exacerbates the problem. Straight people are obliged to try to attract people who are different from them, often in puzzling and frightening ways. This is not just "I have to get along with this person at work or on the street;" it's "I want this person to spend a considerable amount of time naked with me." So we'll look for any clue to help us navigate the weirdness, even the false security of a stereotype.

There's a scene in The American President where the titular character is talking with his tweenaged daughter about an upcoming date. She tells him that if he can't think of anything to say, he should compliment the woman's shoes. It's sound advice; you can rarely go wrong complimenting a woman's shoes, just as you can rarely go wrong offering a man sex. What makes it funny is that a non-fetishistic guy would rarely notice a woman's shoes (My husband only remarks on mine when I'm wearing impractically high heels or sandals in what passes for wintertime in Shreveport). The same thing is true of women, not because we rarely think about sex, but because we are constantly amazed by how high it ranks in a man's thought processes.

So the stereotypes are true, right? Well, sort of. I think there are general differences between men and women, some of them having nothing to do with either shoes or sex. And I think those differences are what both attract and confound us, if we happen to be of a heterosexual orientation. What worries me is how these differences affect our relationships, both intimate and otherwise.

Take the workplace. Does sexual harassment originate because we don't realize that gender differences are not usually relevant when people are trying to earn a paycheck? To put it crudely, this is not the place where you're supposed to pay attention to the fact that I have breasts. You're supposed to notice that I have a keen eye for cataloging mistakes.

And once you get past the initial attraction phase, it's not fair to treat your favorite guy as if he's an out-of-control horndog all the time, if only because you'll find yourself never speaking civilly to another woman again. Differences are fun, fascinating, and maybe even complementary, but your similarities are the glue that will keep you together. Besides, if you've singled him out, he must be different from all other guys, right? What good are the stereotypes then?

What did you see today?

I saw a call to action

Context
I was looking at my library's list of new audiobooks, when I came across Charles Moore's Plastic Ocean: How a Sea Captain's Chance Discovery Launched a Determined Quest to Save the Oceans. I don't plan to read the book, but I was horrified by the idea that there's a part of the ocean where plastic refuse has just taken over.

Commentary
Despite the fact that I haven't read this book, I'm still interested in its purpose. Not so much the environmental one, although cleaning up the oceans is a good and worthy cause, but the motivational one. This book probably contains accounts of both the sea captain's discovery and his quest, but I'm assuming the main purpose is to convince others to join him in the endeavor. In fact, if the description of the plastic-filled North Pacific Subtropical Gyre is horrifying enough, I'm thinking the author believes that will be a sufficient call to action.

It won't be, though.I've written before about how I see a great deal of information, care about only some of it and only act on a small portion of that. At the moment, just reading the basic premise of Plastic Ocean makes me care, but not enough to even take the action of reading the actual book.

Discouraging, no? You could have an epiphany, write a book about it, move people to care, even, and still get no tangible results from the effort. How can an experience that completely changed one person's life have little to no effect on another's? Quick! Hundreds of evangelical preachers are waiting for your answer!

Easy. People are different. Their priorities are different, their values are different, their very way of experiencing the same phenomenon are different. I am concerned about the amount of trash in the ocean. However, at the moment I am more concerned about taking care of my husband and the animals who live in our home, so I won't be changing careers in order to help refarm kelp. I'm concerned about saving time, so I'm not going to take the extraordinary measures necessary to create a zero waste household. And so on. Succinctly, it's not my thing.

And yet not so simple, because I believe our reactions to these differences cause the vast majority of conflicts in both our personal and societal relationships. In a bizarre combination of arrogance and insecurity, we believe if something is important to us, it must be important to everyone. Otherwise, they'll just be wrong. Or we'll be wrong. Or something. So we'll put a great deal of effort into changing others' minds, which is fine. But if that doesn't work, we'll decide to put a great deal of force into doing so. And preventing that IS my thing.

What did you see today?