Two random thoughts:

1. I've long wondered if purdah - or women being "inside people", as the Chinese once used to put it I'm told - wasn't an invention of women that got out control.

2. I've always been completely repelled by that men's look that was very popular in the 1990s - the one that involved beautiful "french blue" shirts and v-neck sweaters worn with no shirt underneath. It's very stylish to my eye, but I did always find it was being sported by men who felt they were trading on some kind of sexiness - like my MOST BORING DATE ever. So it was "sexy dress" because of that - but it was about sexiness in the same way sexual harassment is about sex. Very mock to me.

Well, I suppose we could always blame the female sex for their own religious and social oppression. After all, they did participate in foot binding, female castration, anorexia, etc. etc. But I think men - who as I think we can agree have historically had immense power over women's lives - bear the elephant's share of the blame for making those things desirable to, or necessary for, women.

Of course, I immediately thought of the "blame the victim" counter-argument. It's quite interesting how you get one response with the Pogo cartoon, on the matter of "we are our own enemy," and another when you get to the really ugly stuff. And most certainly with foot binding and female castration, grown women were/are really on-board. Foot binding I feel must be an invention by women for women. I don't know that men like to get that close to women's "matters."

My neighbor and I are contemplating doing a performance art piece: IS IT YOU?

I don't know if it's a different response. We are our own enemy when we absorb negative judgements (usually from men in power, because men ARE in power) and push them outwards on others; when we decide being a woman is a problem or a fault; when we point fingers at other women for decisions they've made in response to social ideas. This is true whether it's foot binding or the word "womanly." We are our own enemy when we hate ourselves, because we've been TAUGHT to hate ourselves, because of the social dynamic we're in.

In short, I doubt women invented purdah, but they may have embraced it for social or religious factors as a result of a hostile world created by men. And it IS and HAS BEEN a hostile world.

Now, I will also acknowledge that oppression can also be a source of power if it's co-opted. I know many women argue that the bourka is a source of power, when others argue the opposite. It all depends on your framework.

Also: I've actually done a bit of research on foot binding and it was done for men. Because it was associated with status, it became super sexy. Women like to appeal to men, so they did it - it was a way to marry off your daughter and make sure she ate every day. Who's to blame? Everyon, for buying into this weird fetish. But definitely let's not let men off the hook here or anywhere else, because let's face it, women often HAD to please men to live. They didn't have a hell of a lot of other options.

I think these things grow. Start small and grow. Someone says, "her feet are too big." Somebody hears that and thinks, "I'm gonna keep my daughter's feet small." She tries it, her neighbor tries it... but I don't know that many men saw the unbound feet or could have possibly enjoyed the smell of rot. You have to raise up the men to expect it.

Point fingers at other women for decisions they've made in response to social ideas

That's an interesting one, because social ideas are social. That is, we're talking about things you do that effect your neighbors. And people don't see how things effect and hurt their neighbors. One person's inventive and positive sex life is another person's call to CPS. Saw a whole lot of that growing up the Bay Area. Still do. A whole lot. I mean, I have to live in my liberal locales, but that's not one of the bright spots of doing so.

I really encourage you to research the beginnings of these things. Many of them are very well-documented.

I think the rules come from men. Women tend to enforce them as the keepers of societal norms - not wanting their daughters to be ostracized or shunned. But it's men who set the standards and expectations. If you take the men out of the picture, would foot binding and waist cinching and all that still exist? I went to a women's college and can tell you that not having guys around was 100% freeing at that age, at least for me.

Is it more likely to be the mom or the dad who teaches their daughters how to dress, diet, and present themselves to the world? And for whose eyes?

I've looked into foot binding. The available evidence on its origins is not impressive, for all the volumes written.

Agree, AG.

"We are our own enemy when we absorb negative judgements (usually from men in power, because men ARE in power) and push them outwards on others; when we decide being a woman is a problem or a fault; when we point fingers at other women for decisions they've made in response to social ideas. This is true whether it's foot binding or the word "womanly." We are our own enemy when we hate ourselves, because we've been TAUGHT to hate ourselves, because of the social dynamic we're in."

I agree that if we have internalised (& not examined) the expectations society has for us then we will naturally side with the oppressors. Whether the reasons are good or bad women are colluding with the powerful to oppress other women. We have been taught to hate ourselves & we can & do project that hate onto other women who don't fit our social norms. As women we do raise our male & female children so imo we need to take some responsibility, even if it's only to show our kids there is another way

Caro, so well put. I started this thread because I didn't like the reaction I had to a word. And look how deep it's gone.

I love how open minded you are Una & how you examine your reactions