Women, Women, Women: America’s Greatest Untapped Natural Resource

In an age when world attention is centering on a reevaluation of world power, not in terms of what is above the ground, but what is beneath it, it seems only fitting that we now define America's greatest untapped natural resource--Women!  

It is a world shifting so quickly that every existing institution is undergoing radical change...but a world where the existence of the unchanging system still has firm hold. It is, indeed, a paradox. At a time in history when the age of technology has made it possible through a vast and complex media to transmit ideas around the world, we are still fighting archaic, 18th century ideas about women's place in the world.

Make no mistake about it, we are undergoing a revolution of sexual identity. It's been a long time coming, but its arrival was inevitable, and long overdue. When second-class citizens began to fight for the right to live in dignity. It was just a matter of time when women, the original second-class citizen, would realize it was their fight too. All of this has now led to the ultimate concern for human rights, which has suddenly thrust itself upon the world along with our foreign policy. What remains, however, is what we do about it at home.

In her new book, Toward a New Psychology of Women, Dr. Jean Baker Miller, defines the battle for equality as emancipation, and describes the battling forces as dominants vs. subordinates. Let me quote some of her comments:

"nce a group is defined as inferior, the superiors tend to label it as defective or substandard in various ways. Women are supposed to be ruled by emotion, blacks are described as less intelligent than whites, and so on. In addition, the actions and words of the dominant group tend to be destructive of the subordinates. Dominant groups usually define one or more acceptable roles for the subordinate. Acceptable roles typically involve providing services that no dominant group wants to perform for itself. Functions that a dominant group prefers to perform, on the other hand, are carefully guarded and closed to subordinates. Subordinates are usually said to be unable to per- form the preferred roles. Their incapacities are ascribed to innate defects or deficiencies of mind or body, therefore immutable and impossible of change or development. It becomes difficult for dominants even to imagine that sub. ordinates are capable of performing the preferred activities. More importantly, subordinates themselves can come to find it difficult to believe in their own ability. " Dr. Miller goes on to describe the characteristics of subordinates as "submissiveness, passivity, docility, dependence, lack of initiative, inability to act, etc. Should these subordinates show the potential for, or even more dangerously have developed other characteristics-like intelligence, initiative, assertiveness-there is usually no room available within the dominant framework for acknowledgement of these characteristics. Such people will be defined as at least unusual, if not definitely abnormal.

How does media contribute to all of this? If we look carefully, we'll see that advertisements aimed at children , foster sexual stereotypes and roles. The differences in the frequency with which male and female children appear in commercials support this. Overall, the incidence of male children is 31% compared to 13% visibility for females. Clearly there is substantially more representation of boys, and girls react more comfortably to a male than female hero in a commercial. Copywriters tend to believe that the greater resonance of a male voice is reassuring, although research findings do not confirm such a view. Male adults also predominate with 55% male as compared to 8% female. Females are shown in sex-stereotyped capacities, such as mother, ballet dancer, stewardess, etc. Males are shown as fathers, sheriffs, athletes, professors, kings, astronauts, doctors, and mayors.

I took a trip to Sweden not long ago, and wondered how they were handling all this. The Swedes feel that women cannot emancipate themselves from traditional sex roles by their own efforts. Men must help by doing the same. In order to carry off this idea, the Swedish women stopped talking about "women's rights," and started talking about "male Emancipation! " They feel that the traditional demands of courage, strength, go-ahead spirit that are forced on men make it difficult for them to develop their personalities freely. They feel an alliance between men and women is an absolute necessity. Karen Berg, an Assistant Professor of Comparative Literature at the University of Uppsala, where she lectures and researches on sex roles in literature and society, notes: "To me one of the most valuable new developments in this International Women's Year 1975 is that there are beginning to be men who are so fed up with their "colonial" attitude towards women that they are starting all-male groups at grassroots level to discuss their role and to try to change themselves and society."

In a world hung up on keeping women in their designated space, and the pressures on the outer woman by social, economic and psychological actions, reinforced by our media, how can woman free herself? I think that we as women and image makers-whether involved in media, public relations, advertising or big business and education-can make a real contribution as we unwind the chains. In fact, we have a responsibility to do so. We must seek to change our image at home and abroad, as women and human beings. But it must be more than just a good public relations job. It must have the substance of change.

Right now, we're in trouble around the world. The world I is changing fast, and we have been chosen-our generation- to exist in the midst of great flux and change. It is also the most exciting time in the history of humankind, because we are being challenged on every front: morally, ethically, philosophically, psychologically and spiritually. We shall be called on to make the great sacrifice: change. The world, which we previously thought of as a white, Protestant, European community of civilized people, has now become a multi-culture, multi-racial, many splendor thing, diverse in every way. ..and therein lies its strength.

We need to encourage a diversity of attitudes and values so that people can intelligently choose how they shall live- rather than give them a restricted and deficient diet of very few choices. This is the balance that makes objectivity a reality.  

Where is the dialogue, for instance, between the un- employed aerospace welfare recipient and the willing, un- skilled, black welfare recipient? Already there are proposals in Washington, laying out programs whereby many of our elite unemployed and blue collar/white collar workers can join together to clean up our environment. Putting these men and women to the useful task of solving this urgent problem would be a creative way of using their valuable talents.

And what about enjoying real leisure time? Are we talking about golf, football and baseball-competitive games where someone is still trying to win? How can you relax in that atmosphere? We must become sufficiently free to discover ourselves...and dare to take the voyage into inner space. This may help resolve the conditioning to conflict to which we are so accustomed.

As you can see, just revising our views on work and leisure time can affect changes in our attitudes toward racism and the environment. Everything is linked really-for if we aren't a single, living organism, trying to survive in this universe. I don't know what we are.

In his book, The Best and the Brightest, noted journalist, David Halberstam, factually reports the failure of administrators at the highest level of government to deal with the problems of our time.

In examining the quagmire of our involvement in South- east Asia alone, he points out that the men most qualified to interpret foreign policy-the Best and the Brightest-fail to deal with a culture different from ours. Was it arrogance, greed, misunderstanding or just plain racism ? Or was it all these things?

What unfolds, with frightening clarity, is that our elite, the highly educated, most privileged segment of our society-has failed to grasp the problems of the 20th century. If Choate, Croton, Harvard and Yale cannot produce men who understand the complexities of political and social change, then our entire system of education becomes suspect. Apparently, we cannot overcome quickly enough, the politics of boards of education, nor the emotionalism of busing, Bakke, changes in curriculum or revising of history textbooks in time to avoid further catastrophe.

We all agree on the need for less violence, establishing V more meaningful values and limiting commercials in television programming. But I think it is equally important to see to it that the television industry depicts America as it really is: a multi-racial nation where diversity is a strength not a weakness. You will be fought at every level. Ask any television writer. They are discouraged, if not out rightly prohibited from writing any scripts depicting nonwhites and women as human beings. ..or placing values on anything not grounded in crass materialism.

The simple fact is, we have produced a society of people who fail to see the positive contributions of minorities or women-not only to this nation, but to the world. What children learn in their classroom does not conflict with what they see on television or how they live at home. That is why we cannot separate what children see from what their parents see, for it is the parents who, in many cases, perpetuate all the negative images which the children see all around them.

The core of survival is to learn from history. In order to do this, we must first respect other cultures. The handwriting is on the wall. If we do not succeed in humanizing America now. ..this nation will soon be brought to its knees by its own dehumanization. The world will not change until we decide to change it.

Our responsibility should be to begin that change. It will mean turning our talents toward problem solving. We must change our image of ourselves as people, corporations, and organizations and decide, once and for all, how we intend to view ourselves.

In China, through the formation of ancient Chinese pictograms, they can trace and credit almost every important creation of culture to women and of war to men. Language, which is the basis of all culture, is a "mother tongue." Only through oral and written language can useful experience and knowledge be communicated and preserved. The word, "ruling," was derived from the word, "shepherding," which was derived from the word, "mothering." During those days, the ruling hand was shown controlling sheep. A pictogram of "shepherding" showed a kneeling person holding a sheep. The pictogram of "mothering" showed a kneeling person offering her breasts to feed.

In his book, Principles of Conflict, General Tang Zi Chang states "since the rule by force, discipline, privilege and law, replaced the rule by love, wisdom, education and service, a powerful rule was established by force. It could be over- thrown only by force. This was the beginning of Revolution and War." Women, children, jade and silk were the objectives of war and since that time, man was made superior to woman. That's all changing, of course, as China seeks a new level of equality. But it seems to me that the key to woman is the words associated with Mother Rule: art, culture, humanity and love.

This is the essence of woman, the perfect balance to the conflict, revolution and war that the world has become ruled by men. But there is the growing recognition of men that these are human qualities to which we should all aspire!

Nothing of itself is inherently evil or bad, it is only when there is a lack of balance, another point of view or a softening edge, that we find ourselves in trouble. Man still desperately needs and wants the warmth, feeling and nurturing nature of woman. Should women fail to develop these characteristics above all else, both men and women will be in serious trouble.

We have special qualities, let us not offer them up as a sacrifice to gain entrance into a male-dominated world that badly needs the unique inner strengths that woman has historically displayed throughout history: to humanize the sciences, education, the legislative process, the political arena and last, but certainly not least, the family-that unit of human beings that still centers itself around the Universe!  

There are, Dr. Miller points out, many ways to develop these qualities and certainly one of these is to engage our- selves in personal creativity, a changing vision of one's self and of our relationship to the world. Second, we can learn to develop power-not the kind that you need to control others, but inner power, a sense of awareness of oneself . You will find that real power need not assert itself, and that the understanding of it will begin not only to free you, but al11hose around you.

Last, she continues, we must be able to deal with conflict. Conflict begins at the moment of birth. When we feel conflict, there is good reason to believe we should be in conflict. To deal with conflict takes courage, and the results of the interaction with others, builds the inner resources we so badly need.

This country is entering anew era...one it is hoped, that has seen the futility of trying to solve problems, economic and otherwise, at the end of a gun. A new era of trade and negotiation with new nations. This new era emerged after two major events: When we began to turn our efforts from a wartime to a peacetime economy, and the admission of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations. We are slowly changing our policy toward Africa and Cuba and have formally recognized China, and Americans can now, at last, travel allover the world, without restriction.

All of these events have charted America on a new course. From this moment on, it's a brand new ballgame-and there can be no turning back...however strong the desire by many to do so. It is painful to grow and go forward, but growth is always painful.

I once interviewed a famous general, and asked him the question: that in view of our fast changing technology, where will the new battlefields be? He replied: "You're standing on it...communication...whoever gets there first with the message." When one understands that the first order in the conduct of war is to win by policy, the next is to win by diplomacy and the last is to win by military force, but that the best is to win the enemy's mind...it becomes a natural strategy for women allover the world to pursue.  

The world needs a fresh perspective...innovative ideas, a clear view and the courage to carry it off. In short, the world needs women...the natural resource it has enslaved for too long.
[Republishing 3/12/07]

Home