A few years ago, I was your typical office-worker: stressed out, uneven energy, overweight, and inconsistent complexion. Now I'm just your typical 28-year old urban hunter-gatherer on a quest to be healthy, and having a few adventures along the way. See my full bio.
This essay has been making the rounds on Facebook: "30 Things Every Woman Should Have and Should Know by the Time She's 30". Go read it and come back -- I'll wait.
A friend asked what the male equivalent of that essay would be. It's a good question, and it forced me to think about the purpose of the original essay.
The age of 30 was chosen for a reason. It is the age at which women become increasingly aware that they are moving past their sexual prime. In the sexual marketplace, women are heavily judged on the basis of looks, and the age of 30 is symbolic of that power slipping away. It is the age when women's biological clock starts to tick a little louder.
The purpose of the essay is to comfort single women who are coming to grips with their sexual power slipping away.
I'm not passing judgment, I'm just calling it like I see it.
Since men are judged on different qualities than women -- status being the principle difference -- the equivalent piece for men wouldn't necessarily map to the age of 30. In fact, it wouldn't necessarily map to any particular age at all. The equivalent essay for men would be written by a man who has moved from high status to low status -- perhaps a wealthy scion who invested/spent/squandered his family fortune, and then wrote a piece to justify his decisions. Maybe he spent it wisely, maybe he didn't.
If there's a piece of writing that captures what it's like for a man to move from high status to low status, it's "If" by Rudyard Kipling. The poem is all about how a man should deal with changes in fortune -- i.e., changes in status. (Note: there's nothing in there about looks.) "If" is a lesson on the nature of risk. Risk is a fickle thing -- fortunes come and go.
(Ladies, it is very hard for a man to move from high status to low status -- that's often when men commit suicide. Think stockbrokers who lose everything in a market crash or men who lose their jobs. Death seems like a better alternative than the shame of living. I am not trivializing how it feels to have your value decline on the sexual marketplace -- for men or women.)
Also, notice the difference between how men have to earn their sexual power and women inherit their sexual power. "If" talks about doing great things, building stuff, and taking risks. The "Women at 30" essay talks about deserving things (just because you're you!) and coming to grips with aspects of biology that women can't change ("length of your legs, the width of your hips, or the nature of your parents").
Kipling advises men to look their fortunes square in the eye, and to remain unperturbed by both decreases AND increases in status -- i.e., changes in their own value on the sexual marketplace as judged by women. By contrast, the Women Turning 30 essay can't quite look the issue in the eye. Apparently, she has to have an outfit ready in case the man of her dreams wants to see her in an hour (that or her boss).
The underlying insecurity is right there in the title: "30 Things Every Woman Should Have and Should Know by the Time She's 30". Or NOT there. It's not actually an essay for ALL women, it's an essay for SINGLE women. This is the accurate title: "30 Things Every SINGLE Woman Should Have and Should Know by the Time She's 30." But perhaps that was too painful to acknowledge.
And that's what I think bothers me so much about this essay: it arrogantly positions itself as advice -- and advice for all women. If you are a woman who wants to learn "How to live alone, even if you don't like to", this is stellar advice. On the bright side, at least you'll own an "an umbrella that you're not ashamed to be seen carrying."
Here's a brilliant scene near the end of The Jerk. Steve Martin's character was born poor, got super rich by accident, became corrupted by it, and loses it all. (He didn't read any Kipling.) Anyhow, the debt collectors are on their way, and he's depressed and sulking -- but he's pretending that he's fine while grasping at silly things. It pretty much nails the mood of the essay.
A nice umbrella, and a purse. That's all I need.
A nice umbrella, a purse, and a decent piece of furniture. And that's all I need!
And my own email account.
A nice umbrella, a purse, a decent piece of furniture, and my own email account.
AND THAT'S ALL I NEED!
Comments
Hi there to all, how is
Hi there to all, how is everything, I think every one is
getting more from this web page, and your views are pleasant in
favor of new people.
Here is my web page astrology birthday book
I think you're ALL missing
I think you're ALL missing the point.Both discussions of what the different genders need are rediculous, and vain wastes of time.BOTH discussions, including the Steve Martin clip - point out the futile nature of attempting to protect yourself with such trivialities when life changes and changes dramatically.When the final stroke comes down to it and you're breathing your last breath... - do you want to complain about your missing ashtray, the lack of a pretty umbrella or the pain from an ex boyfriend/girlfriend? You had to spend a nite alone!?! Oh my golly.OR do you want to value the life you did lead? ...the love you did share? ... the care you bestowed on others? ...the flowers you enjoyed? ...the places you saw? ...the real freinds you loved.I'm sorry. This is all rediculous.
Normal 0 false false
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
To be honest with you, I think that little article was written for a very young woman. Perhaps in the author’s mind she was speaking to a girl in her late teens to early 20's, to teach her what a grown up woman’s life looks like. I read Glamour in high school for goodness sake! It would have had some sort of weight to it when I was that age, but as a (declining?) 33 year old woman, I can say that a woman by the age of 26 would have figured all this out already (and would have found a way to make it all seem much less shallow). She would have also figured out that the man of her dreams would respect her enough that he would not think to call her and expect to see her in an hour-can you say booty call? And she would have figured out that any boss demanding to see her in an hour had better be paying her a hefty salary.
Some good thoughts. Thanks
Some good thoughts. Thanks for this.
Considering the shallow take
Considering the shallow take on womandome the essay took, I think a better correlation is when men start to lose their physical abilities.This is a better match from the shallow aspect of "sexual power". While women are hailed for their good looks, men are often called upon for heavy lifting. When a man can't lift that heavy box or household applience, can't open the can of pickles for the lady etc., then he's lost that special something which is that mark of older age. Just as some ladies are just ugly, and go through life without much of a difference whether in their prime or not, so for men - some never really reap the benefits of physical prowess. However, depending on how you treat your body (as for women), physical ability (and beauty, for women!) can shine through well past your prime, still, there will inevitably come a day when this gift must come to pass, and this is when the essay (or it's unwritten male counterpart) may just come in handy... I wonder if the subject of status, as present by Kipling's "If", doesn't just supercede the whole affair (of women's issues when passing their prime of sexual power), and qualify as a profound psycho-philosophical kernel for anyone to have a gander at.
Oh get over you vagina, many
Oh get over you vagina, many of us have. Bitter fat divoced woman or 14 year old girl. You generally make life a pain in the ass. I am looking for some technological solution to this. Bitchy women forever blathering their feelings. Thaks for shairing John. Widh the ladies would zip it & explode.
Oh get over you vagina, many
Oh get over you vagina, many of us have. Bitter fat divoced woman or 14 year old girl. You generally make life a pain in the ass. I am looking for some technological solution to this. Bitchy women forever blathering their feelings. Thaks for shairing John. Widh the ladies would zip it & explode.
Hmm. A lot of emphasis on
Hmm. A lot of emphasis on being in relationships just to be in relationships. With one exception, man-crazy women are the most unhappy people I know.As for "single women who are coming to grips with their sexual power slipping away," the in-shape, middle-aged women I know don't have any trouble attracting men. Men seem to forget that although a middle-aged man might want a 25-year-old woman, he'll be competing for them with 30-year-old men with good jobs, no ex-wives, no kids and no beer bellies.
Not all women under 30 have
Not all women under 30 have men falling at their feet, either. Only a relatively small cross-section of attractive, thin, feminine straight women seem to actually exist when it comes to these 'sexual power of teh wimminz' arguments.
Number three about something
Number three about something perfect to wear if a potential employer or the man of your dreams wants to see you in an hour is a perfect illustration of what is wrong with femininity in modern day america. Why would one want to wear the same thing for a job interview as a date with the man of her dreams?
I'm pretty sure it was
I'm pretty sure it was referring to two different outfits... and that's something pretty trivial to pick as an indicator of what's wrong with society, isn't it?
"Something perfect to wear if
"Something perfect to wear if the employer or man of your dreams wants to see you in an hour."Sounds like one thing to me.There's nothing trivial about the fact that most women most of the time assume that men are attracted to the same things as they are attracted to, i.e. achievement, ambition, sotical status.
Eh, it's referring to two
Eh, it's referring to two different outfits, as should be clear to anyone whose first language is English (I apologize if yours isn't). You seem a bit sensitive on the topic; did a woman wear a business suit on your last date? Trust me; most of us do not. :)
I love when women weigh in as
I love when women weigh in as if they know anything about dating other women as a man.
Why must this all be about
Why must this all be about straight people?
You're seeing what you want
You're seeing what you want to see because it fits your biased view of 'how women think'. They are talking about more than one outfit. It's about having an appropriate wardrobe to adapt to different situations. You seem to be assuming a woman would never dress for any other reason than to be sexually attractive to men, even in a job interview (which are often conducted by other women FFS) and this is rubbish. And your cynical little assumption that you know how the majority of women think and feel (while berating them for making assumptions about men? hypocritical) may make you feel you've got the world all figured out, but in my experience people are not so predictable.
The way that is worded,
The way that is worded, something to wear for A or B, is pretty clearly one thing. It is using the singular pronoun for the thing, and joining the two events with an or. If it were two things, it would be something perfect to wear for A and something perfect for B, not something that can be worn for A or B.You completely missed my point. I'd go as far as to say that it is you who is seeing what you want to see because it fits your biased view of how "people like me" think. I'm not saying women should dress for job interviews more like they dress for dates; I'm actually saying that women should dress for dates less like they dress for job interviews and more like they're actually trying to attract a man. As someone who goes on a lot of dates, I have the experience required to speak from a position of authority on the subject.
I think this list is
I think this list is ridiculous. Thank you John for pointing it out. I don't understand why it is so glorified. I'm only 22, but here are my opinions... 1. If you broke up for a reason, why do you need "One old boyfriend you can imagine going back to?" That's a little regressive and a bit too Sex and the City-ish don't you think? 13. Not everyone "deserves it." I don't understand why everyone shakes their fists with righteous indignation "deserving things." You don't deserve anything you didn't earn. 7. On living alone: A 12 guage shot gun helps. Everytime my husband goes out of town I sleep like a baby with that thing cuddled up next to me. Although this applies mostly to single women, there are certainly married women who have to know this. (military wives...)
I'm glad there have already
I'm glad there have already been other commentors that have pointed out that you missed the point of the original article. It's not about being a single woman. It's about being able to take care of yourself no matter who is or isn't in your life. I think this is especially obvious in knowing "How to live alone, even if you don't like to." To me, that's not about being single per se, it's about knowing how to be financially and emotionally independent on your own - you know, like when your husband dies, or you get divorced, or (God forbid) you are single forever. It really doesn't matter if you're single or not - there will not always be someone else around to do things for you, and there are certain things you should learn to do for yourself and certain aspects of caring for yourself that you should know. Personally, I'd set back the age on some of these because - as a 26-year-old woman - I realized that there are some things on that list that I do not possess or do not know and they are good things to have/know.I don't know why you felt compelled to shred this list to pieces and cling to the aspects of it that seem shallow, which I think were actually meant to insert a little humor into the piece.Last thing - a lot of boys could use a list like this because many of the males in our society are financially and emotionally inextricably dependent upon their parents - and they frequently end up transferring that dependence onto their future mates. I think it's a problem we see across genders in society, but would it kill someone to give the dudes out there a little guidance? Okay, I lied, one more thing - I think your analysis of "If" is a bit artificial as well. I don't think If is about your wealth and your status alone. Are all your winnings your fortunes? When you suffer great loss in your life, is it always financial? I'm guessing not. If isn't just about men maintaining quiet dignity in the face of poverty. There's so much more to that poem.
Well said, especially the
Well said, especially the last part about "If." I also agree about changing the age. 30 is very artificial, and I think it's unfortunate how our society seems to be okay with people (of both genders) delaying being responsible adults for so long. (Not that I think that should take away from what someone below said about maintaining a sense of childlikeness in terms of curiosity, wonder, play, adventure, etc. long after we are no longer minors -- I'm all for that!)
I have to disagree with your
I have to disagree with your take on the article about women. I think it's overall tone and point is meant to address milestones that the author (right or wrong) believes one should have reached by the time you're 30, i.e., a "real" adult (at least in the eyes of many these days, that seems to be the age at which that occurs) -- a solid career and financial situation, the ability to care for yourself physically, mentally, spiritually and emotionally, a closet that allows you to dress and present yourself appropriately in a variety of situations, good friendships, the maturity to deal with relationships and situations that are difficult in one way or another, and generally knowing who you are (and aren't) and what you want out of life. I'm not saying I agree with her....in fact there are more than a few points I vehemently disagree with, (for example, the ones about what you "deserve") and a few points that would apply mostly or only to single women, but overall I think you missed the point.*I'm a 32 year old female.And thanks for posting the Rudyard Kipling poem. That is good.
And I think the Kipling one
And I think the Kipling one applies to both genders.
And I think the Kipling one
And I think the Kipling one applies to both genders.
From the essay:"15. A solid
From the essay:"15. A solid start on a satisfying career, <b>a satisfying relationship,</b> and all those other facets of life that do get better."1. How to fall in love without losing yourself."None of the listed items refer to convincing yourself that it's okay to be single and these two are about actually being in a relationship, so I don't see how you can cast it as being for single women trying to console themselves that their 'sexual power' is declining. Seems like you wanted to have a rant that wasn't really relevant to the essay.And repeating what the other commenters are saying, this blog post is called the male equivalent of the essay and tagged masculinity and yet it's mostly about single women
Reading that article felt
Reading that article felt really weird, because it seems (to me) so detached from reality. Being someone with little insight into US culture, the first thing that went through my head was "are American women really this shallow?" (no offense meant, I don't believe that). The only parts of the "must have" list that made any sense to me were 7 and 10, both of which are in no way unique or exclusive to women (everybody needs a friend and a financially secure future). But the rest? Garbage that would mean nothing if your house burns down or you have to go into exile. The "must know" list is IMHO equally important for both women and men (and everyone else), no matter their age. Except perhaps for 10 - childhood is only over when you want it to be :D or is that childishness?
I think you missed the point
I think you missed the point of the article. It's goal is not to comfort single women, but to acct as a rough guide for what women should have as they enter "adulthood." I'm not sure how you distorted a list that deals with having a checkbook and financial security and turned it into something about bemoaning the loss of youth.
You call this 'the male
You call this 'the male counterpart' to the HP article, yet 90% of this post seems to be schadenfreude aimed at single women based on the unfounded assumption that they can't possibly be happy with this state of affairs, rather than any kind of advice for men.
Agreed; the author seems more
Agreed; the author seems more concerned with attacking and delighting in the supposed misery of women turning 30 than he is with offering advice to men. This combined with his protestations that men do not need to worry about age make him seem a bit insecure.
That also combined with the
That also combined with the recurrent theme of "woe are men, women are just GIVEN (sexual) power whereas men have to EARN (financial) power makes the author seem very insecure. Are you worried about how your book is going to do? Also I think he missed a lot of the humor of the original article: "11. A set of screwdrivers, a cordless drill, and a black lace bra." That and others are meant to highlight having phyiscal, emotional, financial, etc security in a humorous way. Finally, to everyone who is weighing in on the "deserving" part of the original article, I actually took that to mean more of "having the self-esteem to know that you deserve something just for you that you are capable of buying yourself" instead of "I've always wanted to buy this, and I really want it, and can afford it, but I feel bad buying myself something I don't need" (sound familiar to anyone?).
Not to mention that women
Not to mention that women generally need (and want) to earn a living financially these days instead of just sitting around looking pwetty and waiting for some man to come and make her his dependent (some 'power', huh?)
So, what you are doing is
So, what you are doing is giving a very charitable read to the author of a magazine-quality-content-article and not applying the same charity to John’s post. John isn’t saying, “woe to man,” but rather looking at the phenomena and trying to explain it with a certain lense or theory. He may be right, and he may be wrong, but he isn't complaining about it. Additionally, if you had been paying attention to John’s posts, finance is not the only form of power for men.
I don't think John's article
I don't think John's article can be taken very charitable. At least the author of the women's article is concerned with advising women. More than half of John's entry is, rather than being an "equivalent" to men, devoted to attacking women who are 30 and single. I'm not sure if he did that just to attract viewers or if he is one of those paranoid, insecure types who sees an opportunity to bash women and exalt women in everything he reads.
Sex appeal isn't the only
Sex appeal isn't the only power available to women (and in fact ISN'T all that available to a large number of them)