女人偷偷恨别的女人神话有着悠久的历史

蓝袜社卡尔·H. Pforzheimer,打破了蓝色丝袜俱乐部(1815)的。 纽约公共图书馆数字化馆藏,CC BY在他的第一次采访总理与今日秀周一,特恩布尔回答了问题,有关女性通过声明逃避家庭暴力增加资金“真正的男人不打女人“。

特定 最近的统计数据 上的流行 对妇女的暴力行为 在澳大利亚,它是不可能被夸大的这条消息的重要性。

但是,当总理的话是显著,就像关键的是鼓励在政治和媒体领袖来呼应他们的任务。 只有这样,我们开始重塑社会如何想的澳大利亚男性和女性之间的关系。

但什么是对女性本身之间的关系目前的文化信息?

最近在媒体和大众文化的结论似乎是,尽管女性不打别的女人,他们都不约而同地在彼此击出。 没有什么新的这个想法。

腹黑女?

在过去的十年中,社会学的研究结果都力求展现女孩的欺凌采取的形式 关系攻击 - 口头和情感虐待 - 而不是男生中发现的物理攻击。

这引发了人们对所有年龄段的“贱女孩”的争论。 但它不只是一个子集女性谁被说成搞“女孩对女孩的犯罪“。

相反,背刺或高调的女性之间的闲聊,以及有关社会化媒体女明星“淫荡”的评论,事件已被扣押作为证据,证明敌意是所有女性的自然状态。

记者兴高采烈地名人如之间在Twitter上的战斗报告 泰勒·斯威夫特与本站Minaj, 碧昂丝和蕾哈娜,并 科勒·卡达夏和Amber玫瑰.

妇女将为了男性注意竞争睫毛出在彼此的前提下也可用于娱乐,作为上 学士墨尔本的真实主妇。 或喜剧值,如 克里斯·洛克的 站立程序。

然而,社会评论家也看待“贱女孩”的刻板印象作为一个新的发现,或人的条件仅最近承认一部分。

神话历史较长

在现实中,认为妇女偷偷恨彼此有着悠久的历史。

数百年来,女性被宣判不能“真正”的友谊。 维多利亚时代的浪漫庆祝友谊女性之间,同时也描述了他们,简单准备女性为了婚姻一样肤浅的激情。

而不是享受男人间找到了长久的友谊,女人之间的债券描绘成昙花一现,无法承受妇女争吵的本性。

在女性 (1851),德国哲学家叔本华,宣称男性陌生人或熟人之间的感觉是“纯粹的冷漠”; 对女性来说是“实际敌意”。

同样,一神论部长,作家威廉Rounseville阿尔及尔,在 女人的友谊 (1868),得出结论:

我经常被少数妇女[...],并由表示相信的共性的感悟记录的例子都打,那强烈的自然障碍使友谊与他们相对软弱难得的经历。

更糟的是,潜在的敌意被刻画使得这些关系潜在的危险。 在最极端的,女性的友谊被认为诱发女性犯罪行为。

正如十九世纪的犯罪人类学家 切萨雷龙勃罗梭 argued in Criminal Woman, the Prostitute and the Normal Woman (1893):

Due to women’s latent antipathy for one another, trivial events give rise to fierce hatreds; and due to women’s irascibility, these occasions lead quickly to insolence and assaults. […] Women of high social station do the same thing, but their more refined forms of insult do not lead to law courts.

Australia inherited this western cultural tradition of demonising relationships between women. It is no wonder that Australian historian Nick Dyrenfurth found mateship to have been a “steadfastly male” institution in his recent 历史 关于这个问题的。

A Biological Imperative?

For many past and the present commentators, the main reason women supposedly lack sorority is thought to be sexual jealousy.

It is alleged this could even be 生物 - a drive left over from a period when securing male support was necessary to female survival.

Indeed, Lombroso was one of the first to espouse this Darwinian view of female relations. He claimed that competition for “resources” led to an instinctive hatred of their own sex among both animal and human females.

While such contentions remain unproven, they have proved influential.

In the nineteenth century, such sentiments made women scapegoats for their own suffering. Prostitution was blamed not on capitalism, but on the vindictiveness of those already in the trade. Victorian sex workers reputedly sought to “drag down” other women to their level.

There was “the feeling” among prostitutes of “the fox who has lost his tail and wants to get all the other foxes to have their tails cut off too”, suffragist Agnes Maude Royden suggested in her 1916 book Downward Paths.

Conversely, “respectable” women were accused of enforcing the moral standards that prevented the rehabilitation of “fallen women”. For nineteenth-century Melbournian journalist “流浪者” John Stanley James, it was “woman alone” - never man - that cast “stones at her erring sister”.

This perspective continues in society today. According to commentators like Samantha Brick, it is women, not men, who objectify, belittle and sabotage attractive women, especially those who have embraced their sexuality.

Professional women

Women may have been freed from their reliance on a male provider during the twentieth century, but this is not said to have lessened female rivalry. Rather, this phenomenon is seen to have simply moved into the 专业领域.

Many believe female bosses are tougher on women employees, reluctant to help others shatter the glass ceiling for fear of losing their own privileged position.

一个2011 psychological study concluded that accusations of “Queen Bee” behaviour usually resulted from women being held to different professional standards. Competitiveness and authoritarianism, researchers found, were perceived negatively when displayed by women, but not men.

Again, such perceptions are nothing new.

In the illicit economy of the nineteenth century, brothel-keepers were described as jealously guarding the more privileged position they held over the ordinary prostitute. Madams were said to cheat other women out of their wages with a sense of schadenfreude.

There were similar allegations of female exploitation in the legitimate economy. Social reformer Helen Campbell, in Prisoners of Poverty (1900), an investigation of American female factory workers, declared:

Female industrial supervisors are not only as filled with greed and as tricky and uncertain in their methods as the worst class of male employers, but even more ingenious in specific modes of imposition.

The Myth Continues

Whether in their professional or personal lives, it is true that women do not always treat other women well. But the same can be said for men.

We could just as easily find evidence that all men hate each other - for example, by pointing out that the majority of violent crime is by men against other men.

Yet centuries of being told women are each others worst enemies has resulted in 确认偏误. We are programmed to identify evidence that supports the pre-existing hypothesis.

And when stories of female rivalry grace our screens - for example, between mothers in The Hand that Rocks the Cradle (1992), the four-girl clique in 漂亮的小骗子 (2010-present) and rival crime queens in Underbelly: Razor (2011) - these narratives are simply more titillating than the prosaic reality of male violence.

A preoccupation with girl-on-girl “crime” not only distracts from the greater problems women face, such as the violence committed against them by men, but to some extent validates the women-as-lesser attitudes that contribute to such crimes.

Cultural critic H.L. Mencken once defined a misogynist as a man who hates women as much as women hate one another. Glibly suggesting that all women hate each other gives tacit permission for men to hate women too.

关于作者谈话

alana piperAlana Piper, Research Fellow, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University. She has a broad range of interests involving Australia’s social and cultural history, particularly pertaining to issues of social order and control, the media, and gender, class and racial identity.

本文最初发表于 谈话。 阅读 原创文章.

相关图书:

Rad American Women A-Z: Rebels, Trailblazers, and Visionaries who Shaped Our History . . . and Our Future! (City Lights/Sister Spit)

作者: Kate Schatz
绑定: 精装
出版商: 城市之光“出版
价格表: $14.95
优惠 - 购买新的来源: $6.83 使用从: $4.78
现在购买