 |
 |
 |
ESCAPE FROM AESCULAPIUS
Our
culture subtlety conditions us to think, act and feel defective. We
are continually programed that we are inferior beings.
This preconditions us for low self esteem. Of course, all programming
is not evil or bad. For example, we are programmed to confine our
eliminatory processes to flushable places and to cultivate appreciation
for music and art.
The effectiveness of programming has been proven in many tests where children of all ages are given pictures to identify -- pictures of children, women and men. They know the difference, even if science claims otherwise, since they never pick out a picture of a child or a woman when they are asked to select a picture of man or mankind.
There are very few opportunities given us to deprogram -- the most universal is, of course, experiences, our own and others that we can learn from. Once we become aware of how our society programs us, we can quickly learn to recognize and avoid it if we choose.
Science, like religion, subjects us to a great deal of subtle negativity about our gender. Think of how often you hear the word, MAN or MANKIND. We are told that the term is generic and that we are included. Our common sense tells us that we ARE NOT since one has only to skim through a human anatomy text to discover that "man" most definitely means male.
Although many of the more recent textbooks may present at least one illustration of a surface view of both genders, most of the pictures and descriptions feature only the male of our species. Under the heading of reproductive system, the female is obediently trotted out in the form of breasts (mammary glands), uterus, ovaries, fallopian tubes, cervix, vagina and external genitalia. Seldom is an intact female shown. She is reduced to her functions: sexual receptacle, incubator and dispenser of nutrition for "his" young.
The text may also be pejorative. Anatomical (normal) illustrations of ovaries of a post menopausal woman may be described as having "failed," just as conception problems may be blamed on the "failure" of the uterus. We find these words used to describe women's reproductive organs but never see this wording used in the discussion of any of the male organs. One will, however, see "fail" and "failure" in pathology (disease) textbooks (renal failure, cardiac failure etc.)
If one needs additional confirmation that this is done intentionally, a look at a text of comparative anatomy provides an interesting contrast. Gender does not appear to be an overriding factor in the illustrations. Descriptive words do not employ derogatory content. In fact, nearly all of the OTHER animals named by men are given a name that both genders share (cat, dog, pig etc.)
Today, as more and more women are becoming part of the scientific faculties of universities and laboratories, we might have hoped that the language would be moderated. It has not been, although there are more limits on what may be chosen for illustrative purposes.
We do not infer that those in science and/or medicine must take all the blame. There are many dedicated women and men in the health care services who toil daily to conquer disease and pain. We laud their efforts. Nevertheless, the so-called progress for womankind is ephemeral when it comes to her current medical prognosis -- an inferior body needing constant medical attention.
Only a few years ago, the medical profession ignored women. All "woman problems" were thought to be EMOTIONAL. Then little by little, our physical body began to get more attention, and now we have come full circle back to where we were. 'Gappers believes that this dilemma stems from a multi-headed Hydra of causation. We identify two of the heads as being women's own validation of PMS as a female flaw, and the cacophony created around breast cancer by otherwise well-meaning people.
This is not to disparage any of the relatively few women who actually do have a hormonal problem, but PMS has been used by multitudes of women to get a day or two off from work, or to avoid problems, or to excuse recklessness. Now all of us must pay for it since language -- this time coming from us, reinforcing what men have claimed -- has pronounced that our gender is unstable, irritable, untrustworthy, and mentally incapacitated for several days every month.
Oh, and to include all women, menopause is demonized also by characterizing a NORMAL decrease in estrogen as a dreaded disease that causes women to be unstable, irritable, un- trustworthy and mentally incapacitated.
Of course, we are told to make ourselves dependent on medicinal estrogen. The alternative would be to take control of ourselves. Exercise, diet and personal responsibility may take some effort, but it is far superior to dependence on exogenous chemicals.
"To control others is to have power, to control ourselves is to know the Way." Lao Ma (Xena:W-P)
To further lower women's self-esteem and raise her anxiety quotient off the scale, we are constantly being bellowed at and commanded to subject ourselves and our inferior breasts again and again to x-rays. All these many years and we still have NO SAFE AND RELIABLE diagnostic tool to detect mammary tumors. Contrast this with the development of a simple blood test to detect prostate cancer that scientists apparently had time and money to discover.
So, what medicine and men have been saying for years, women are confirming -- it is not safe to put women in leadership positions. Neither their bodies nor their minds can be trusted to have the stability to stand up to the pressures of office.
Expect
to hear much more about this from the media as vice presidential choices
are being made, and whenever and where ever a woman runs for office BECAUSE
IT IS BEING SAID IN THE STREETS AND AROUND THE WATER COOLERS. It
has become joke de jure on most sitcoms. We have allowed ourselves
to be maligned this way just to escape a little discomfort associated with
menses and the normal aging process. This was called sexism when
men said it, but now what should we call it when we are continually malign
ourselves?
"On Old Olympus's Towering Tops," that ancient god, AESCULAPIUS must be laughing his a$$ off, bragging to the other good-ol'-boy-gods how he has convinced women to confirm as fact what he and his practioners decreed eons ago.
1999-047
Copyright 1999 Renee T. Louise and Ruth M. Sprague, Ph.D. These articles may be republished for noncommercial use only, provided that they are copied intact, and that this copyright notice is attached. Address all queries to: twanda@ConnRiver.net.
G e n d e r G a p p e r s T M
|
|
|