Christian Wawrzonek wrote a column last week proposing that anger is a counterproductive response to bring to any campus discussion about gender issues. This was in reaction to the latest exposé of a blatantly sexist club culture at Tiger Inn. There is an almost wincing hesitation in his piece that made me initially reluctant to write a response: Anyone who publicly identifies himself among the “we” of a group on campus with a tendency to “shout down feminists” deserves an appreciative round of applause for broaching the issue in a mature and respectful way that nevertheless exposes him (as he knows all too well) to an onslaught of knee-jerk ad-hominem attacks. Still, he invited the shouted-down (and shouting) feminists to have a real conversation, so it’s only common courtesy to respond in kind.
Several of Wawrzonek’s points indicate that after a thoughtful contemplation of gender issues, he still hasn’t quite grasped that foreign "female perspective" he describes so empathetically. Take his explanation of why men and women don’t see eye-to-eye on catcalling. In his adopted women’s shoes, he supposes that “having to deal with constant superficial attempts at flattery and kindness as attempts to gain sexual favors would become exhausting and annoying.” This is true, but so far from being the worst consequence of street harassment, that it is almost beside the point. Being called “sexy baby” on the street is not merely annoying because of its smarmy insincerity. It is a threat. If Wawrzonek had ever sat in a self-defense seminar where instructors advise him to carry a whistle wherever he goes, check behind his car before opening the door and always invite a trusted friend of the opposite gender on night walks, he would be much less likely to find sexualized comments from strangers neutral, flattering or casually irritating. They are a frustrating and too often frightening reminder that the object of the catcall is perceived as a vulnerable member of the “weaker sex.” Sometimes the threat is explicit and intended. Sometimes it’s buried under a veneer of misguided humor or friendliness. The message is always there. In attempting to disassociate catcalling from sexual assault, Wawrzonek misses the power dynamics guiding both. Sexual assault statistics make me feel insecure. So does the 20-year-old stranger making remarks about my appearance on the street corner. And yes, both make me angry.
Which brings us to the other point I had trouble digesting in Wawrzonek’s column. He calls anger an unhelpful and self-perpetuating obstacle to real conversation on these issues. He asserts that given the dramatic differences in men and women’s experiences, “you can’t expect men to understand this disparity if many don’t even realize it exists.” He uses this understanding gap to explain why women should not let male insensitivity upset us. But I am upset, and I have not yet heard a compelling argument for reevaluating this reaction. I am upset that there are people (Wawrzonek’s division of feminists and anti-feminists along gender lines is utterly false) who fail to “understand” my experience of street harassment, and I am equally, if not more, upset that there are people who “don’t even realize it exists.” I don’t think this is an inappropriate or unproductive reaction. My anger is what motivates me to try to change the current social reality. Anger is what Wawrzonek is responding to in his piece. He may not like it, he may even feel repelled by it, but he acknowledges it and it’s making him join the conversation.
True, flaring up when the man selling me tissues at the C-Store calls me “sweetie” is probably not helpful for the greater cause of equality. I recognize that and renew my resolution not to bite his nose off every time this occurs. Nose biting in general is a very poor tactic for spreading feminist gospel. Hearing about the sexist shenanigans on the TI listserv makes me want to scream with nauseous rage. There are multiple ways for me to channel this anger. Some are obviously unproductive. If I happen to lose my temper arguing over victim blaming with an insensitive acquaintance, I recognize that there is probably no constructive value to that interaction.
The emotion behind the pointless shouting, however —that is what we cannot afford to lose. The day I can listen to a friend’s story of how she was sexually harassed in a club without feeling and expressing fury that we live in a society where this is "normal" is the day I stop fighting for a different kind of society. I suspect Wawrzonek agrees that the other society —the one where women enjoy equality, security and respect —is the ideal. In the interest of achieving it, I propose a deal: I’ll stop screaming if you stop telling me to calm down.
And let the healing begin.
Tehila Wenger is a politics major fromColumbus, Ohio. She can be reached at twenger@princeton.edu.
Read More
On encampments, free speech, and ‘time, place, and manner’ rules on university campuses
Christopher L. EisgruberPresident Christopher Eisgruber ’83 comments on encampments, free speech, and “time, place, and manner” rules.
President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 comments on encampments, free speech, and “time, place, and manner” rules.
Princeton needs to be a climate justice leader — emphasis on the ‘climate,’ emphasis on the ‘justice’
Alex Norbrook and Eleanor Clemans-Cope“Princeton must not only withdraw its support from injustices, but also positively re-invest in sustainable and community-informed initiatives.”
“Princeton must not only withdraw its support from injustices, but also positively re-invest in sustainable and community-informed initiatives.”
Princeton must move towards a world-changing curriculum
Luqmaan Bamba“If we in the Orange Bubble are supposed to be taught how to be changemakers, our education should not just stop at learning about change but also extend to the tangible application of it.”
“If we in the Orange Bubble are supposed to be taught how to be changemakers, our education should not just stop at learning about change but also extend to the tangible application of it.”
