A thing happened today that got me thinking.
As I was dressing today, I let my mind play with the idea of 1984-me back in 1880. From what I know, she would be so out of her element. 1984 me would have been born in 1962 and would have grown up in a world actively trying to create women’s rights.
Dropped back into 1880… A man’s world, I’d imagine. She would have been stifled!
2024 finds equality still wanting for women and minorities. On paper, it should be there. And I think the struggle for it has created an interesting situation.
I stopped into a coffee shop between my first site and second. There was a young man, maybe 25 or so, ahead of me.
The 50-something barista gave him a big smile. “What can I get for you, Sweetie?”
That seemed cordial. He didn’t seem to mind.
At the next site I visited, a 50-something electrician said to me as he passed by, “Hey, Honey, if you want some donuts, there’s plenty in the office.”
I cringed at the vocative use of “honey,” yet “sweetie” rolled over me without any ill-effect. Why? They are parallel if viewed in a vacuum.
Because of the struggle… Women and minorities are very sensitive to anything that threatens the struggle for equality. Is “honey” always demeaning? I don’t think the man meant it that way, yet I cringed. Certainly, some men who demean women would use words like that in some attempt, conscious or not, to show power. Or something.
But, gender flipped, the equivalent use of “sweetie” has no such effect.
I gratefully indulged in a donut, by the way.
What the 1984 version of me must be going through!
My final thoughts dragged Merriett into my mind exercises. It occurred to me that his demeanor is respectful, kind, and thoughtful. So, hook that up with his good looks, good personality, and promising career and there’s no wonder he has taken over such a big space in my idle thoughts.
And… sharing that dream just made it more intense.
No comments:
Post a Comment