Ik hoor de afgelopen dagen een radio reclame, voor een bank. Ik weet niet meer welke bank, maar ergens zegt de radiostem “een goede bank, hoor”.
Hoor…
Sinds ik een opleiding heb gevolgd op het snijvlak van conflict mediation en coaching heb ik een nieuw gehoor. Mijn opleiding heeft me geleerd dat er bij conflicten meestal iets anders speelt dan uitgesproken wordt. Er zit iets onder de oppervlakte. De truc is om de onderliggende angel te vinden; daar waar het echt om gaat. Sindsdien trigger ik op woordjes als “hoor”.
Met dat ene woordje ‘hoor’ haalt de reclame de hele bank onderuit. “een goede bank, hoor”… hoor? Oh… was er twijfel dan? Heeft iemand gezegd dat het geen goede bank is waardoor er nu iets als “jawel hoor” gezegd moet worden? Hoezo, waarom twijfelen mensen? Moet ik ook twijfelen? Ok, ik twijfel.
Zo werkt dat dus. Misschien twijfelde er helemaal niemand. Misschien alleen de bank zelf. Misschien heeft de bank een laag zelfvertrouwen. Resultaat: ik heb een laag bankvertrouwen.
Mijn nichtje kan dit ook. Als haar grote broer iets stoers laat zien zegt ze nog weleens, out of nowhere: “dat kan ik ook hoor”. Oh? Ok, maar… moet dat dan? Was het een wedstrijd? Voor haar misschien wel. En doordat het voor haar een wedstrijd is ga ik die twee meteen vergelijken. En ja… dan staat de oudere broer vanaf de start voor met 1-0. En dus staat zij achter, op basis van die ‘hoor’.
Ik zit me nu af te vragen wat eigenlijk het bestaansrecht is van het woord ‘hoor’. Het is gebruikt om meer overtuiging te geven, “jawel hoor”, en het doet precies het omgekeerde. Waarom zou een kind zichzelf aanleren dit te gebruiken? Waar ziet ze het wel werken? Werkt het misschien nog wel onder kinderen? Kan je kinderen sterker overtuigen van iets door ‘hoor’ toe te voegen.
Kind 1: “ik kan 8-jes fietsen”
Kind 2: “ik kan 8-jes fietsen hoor”
Kind 1 klinkt als een blij kind. Kind 2 klinkt als een kind dat iets probeert te bewijzen. Kind 2 klinkt niet noodzakelijk als een aardig kind tegenover het kind tegen wie ze het zegt… Beetje intimiderend… Zin om mijn nichtje te zien. Zin om haar te vertellen dat ze, precies zoals ze is, fantastisch en goed genoeg is… hoor.
I went to the doctor the other week. My right foot, specifically my big toe, had been hurting and acting weird on and off for maybe a year. It didn’t feel serious. My toe is a piece of my body that’s so far away from my hands and head, I can’t even touch it without bending my knee. But I had time, so I thought, get it checked. They made an echo and it showed something in the joint: wear.
Well this is ironic…
I didn’t understand what caused it. My doctor asked wether I had done any intensive sports. I didn’t. I’m otherwise in good health and only 42 years old. I didn’t understand until the next day when I went to the office. I have been off work for months, wearing nothing other than sneakers or easy boots. To the office I wore my high heels. Au… My big toe was pushing directly on to the part that hurt. It’s gender wear… I have wear on my joint from my ‘female’ footwear. WTF!
I read an article a few weeks ago, regarding expectations of women and what they wear at work. The article wasn’t about shoes, but in the comments somebody mentioned that they did think that women shouldn’t complain when asked to wear heels. Because it made women taller, which was convenient given that women are often shorter than men. ‘And you want to be able to look each other in the eye‘. Okay, I have an idea: why don’t we make men shorter? Let them bent their backs. It may cause back problems, but hey, so do high heels for women. I would think that women have built up some credit by now? Dear men, you’re up.
Of course I’m not serious. Ridiculous to ask or motivate people to injure themselves. Especially because in my opinion, the reason is bullshit. It’s not about eye contact. I’m 1.80m. I don’t need the length. High heels on women accentuate their tits and ass. And for some weird reason we have come to find that accentuation so normal, that we now call it ‘feminine’.
The ‘female’ Barbie. Let me guess, she wears a skirt and heels? If so, if ‘skirt and heels’ is our concept of ‘female’, than what is a Barbie without skirt and heels?
I don’t often wear skirts or dresses at work. They are very inconvenient. Let me share with you the drawbacks of skirts and dresses:
There are often no pockets. So where do you leave your phone or other intimate items you want to have with you at all times? (don’t say purse. A purse is not the same as a pocket. A purse is luggage. I don’t want to bring my luggage with me to every meeting or bathroom)
It’s not impossible, but it’s really inconvenient on a bicycle. Motivating me to take the car (not friendly for climate) or public transport (requiring me to walk more – remember the heels-problem?).
It’s cold in the winter. Panties help a little, but not enough.
A skirt or a dress limits you in your movements, particularly in the ways you can sit. You need to keep your legs together.
Panties suck 1. They break easily so you are required to watch all remotely sharp objects or even velcro coming near your legs at all times. I don’t have time for all this hassle. And by the way, why do desks at the office have a bunch of sharp metal objects and/or velcro tie wraps under it breaking my panties every time I cross my legs? Can we please start designing the bottom of a desk leg-friendly?
Panties suck 2. Because they break so easily you need to bring nailpolish with you or an extra pair, just in case. More luggage and stuff I may forget.
Panties suck 3. They don’t breath because they are made of nylon (plastic). So you sweat more.
Panties suck 4. Because they are made of nylon, if they break, or even if you wash them, you create plastic (micro)waste.
Panties suck 5. Because they break so easily, you need a lot of them and they cost money.
I’m a pragmatic person, so I don’t wear skirts often. But when I do wear a skirt I get more compliments, some of them literally that I look ‘beautifully feminine‘. Strange. Born as a woman, I did not come out of the womb wearing a skirt (or heels for that matter). I was born with legs and flat feet. All women are… So why is it feminine? Is it just culture? If so, why do we live in a culture where looking ‘feminine’ requires way more of women (time in front of the mirror and in the bathroom (putting make up on and off, shaving legs), way more money (make up, panties), inconvenience (panty, no pockets, no cycling, limited sitting) and even physical pain and wear), than it requires of men to look masculine?
If so than I want a new culture. I want a culture where we compliment women on looking feminine or just beautiful when they wear pants, low shoes and no make up. Because that’s what a real woman looks like, without all the extra effort, and it should be good enough. I’m not saying we should ban skirts or condemn women who wear high heels. But maybe that outfit is the female equivalent of macho. Maybe call it mucha. That way we can have a bit more diversity in the spectrum and we can give women who treat their feet friendly, or who have a need for a pocket, warm legs and ease of movement, just as much chance at a compliment on beauty or looking ‘female’ as someone in mucha gender wear.
