Yes, I’m wearing a skirt right now, let that not color the following.
On Being Ladylike
I just had my sisters over for our monthly tea and, as it often does, conversation briefly touched on politics. And, as I do when it does, I did not say anything. My sisters are all much more conservative than I (starting with #5, who votes Republican; then #4, who things Republicans are too liberal; and finally #2, who votes Constitution Party because Republicans are too liberal on some things and not liberal enough on others).
The political comment in question was “Hillary should be more ladylike”. Followed by a brief discussion of how great it was that Obama held a chair for her at the beginning and end of a particular debate. And how wonderful it is that he’s being so gentlemanly. Which just goes to show, he’s popular among conservatives, too. I wondered vaguely if this was seen as some sort of putting-her-in-her-place by my sisters, but, again, held my tongue.
“What do you think, #6?” said #4 (and yes, we do often refer to each other by number, though not usually in conversations 
, to which I responded, “I think my political views are not welcome at this table.” Which got some put-her-at-ease laughter, and some more pressure.
All of these sisters wear skirts all the time. All of them believe that a woman should quit her job when married. So I was asked which Democratic candidate I would vote for, and I told them (Obama) followed by a caveat that I don’t vote Democratic because they’re too conservative for me. This prompted some fantastically uncomfortable laughter, and then I said,
“I think all candidates in any political sphere could benefit from more civility but I think that acting more “ladylike”, as #2 suggests would make Hillary seem inappropriate for a leadership role. Since that is what she is angling for, I don’t think that “ladylike” will benefit her.”
Talk turned to McCain, who could also use some additional civility (and was clearly the best of the choices mentioned so far, to my sisters) and then to Margaret Thatcher. Who is the best of all worlds as a conservative woman. “She was so classy!” said #5. To which I responded, “Hillary might well benefit from more class, but I don’t define that as being more ladylike.” [Of course, Ms. Thatcher is a Baroness, so she arguably has more class than any American ever could.]
Which got me thinking about “ladylike”. I have often said that “I ain’t no lady” and gotten mock-offended at people who presumed to call me such. I’ve also often said, (especially after working in an office and starting to actually where a skirt, an activity I rebelled against for much of my life) that you can put a skirt on a woman, but you can’t make her a lady. Being ladylike has always seemed, in my mind, to denote being demure, behind-the-scenes, and, above all, submissive. None of these are adjectives I ever want applied to me. None of these are adjectives I would ever apply to Hillary. As much as I disagree with her, I respect her; and it’s difficult for me to respect “ladies”.
I’m sure that other peoples definitions of “ladylike” would involve some additional skills, like knowing which fork to use, or cutting with your right hand; but even if I were to marry a Lord, I would object to the title of Lady. If he were a Baron, I would insist on Baroness, for example. There are connotations to “lady” that I am glad to not apply to the only woman ever to get this far in a presidential bid.
This morning, I dressed for tea: a skirt and nice top, with appropriate earrings. And so I was actually in a skirt during this conversation, but for some reason, it brought to mind the fact that all these sisters wear skirts; all the time. And most often, I wear jeans. (Even to tea, but today I hosted.) I see skirts as a way to combat the heat of LA: you get a nice draft that’s so great that I want to get my husband into utilikilts. Sometimes, as a way to show of my awesome legs. Occasionally, as a means of securing privacy while peeing in the forest. But my sisters see it as something more…something…ladylike. Which makes me think that they see pants as un-ladylike. And I’m very uncomfortable with gendered (anything) clothing. I’m a huge fan of boy-beaters (although I think men who wear them are of questionable morals, I don’t see it as a non-masculine article of clothing), I like skirts on men, I think bras are unnecessary for most men, but still don’t really see it as a gendered article of clothing. The only gendered article of clothing I can call to mind is the jock strap (which still makes me giggle: who invented that?!).
I guess this is just a rant about the differences between my world-view and that of my sisters. Am I wrong? Does “ladylike” ever denote something positive (in the sense that it could also be used, positively, to describe a man; a non-gendered positive), or is it always passive, submissive, and female? A girl in my apartment complex held the door for me the other day, while I was slowly making my way tot he laundry room with a full basket. I told her not to worry, that she needn’t wait for me. “Holding a door open only takes a second,” she replied. Good on her! Holding doors, coats, and chairs should be something people do for each other, not something men do for women.
The above was merely a case of the vapors, pay no attention to this lady’s ramblings.
