There’s a new channel on Norwegian Tv. It’s «The woman’s channel, fem». Their slogan is that it’s «made for women, with access for men», and the posters are filled with pink shoes. Pink shoes? Pink shoes. Ten years ago, just talking about Girl’s and boy’s colours were a taboo, and now luring women with photos of pink shoes is considered good coutume.
Seriously, tv channel makers. What are you thinking?
It’s not the pink shoes that upsets me, and it’s not the existence of a channel with dating programs and yaddayadda that upsets me. I can just chose to not watch it, right? Like I do with almost every other tv-channel out there? And perhaps the generalisation that women and men like different tv-programs wouldn’t upset me so much if it didn’t try to place me in a category where I’d feel completely alienated. Cause it’s true that there’s loads of stereotypical male films that I can’t even find vaguely amusing. I don’t like watching people killing each other, and I don’t care to watch people hitting each other in the face. Long fight scenes are boring. Perhaps a tv channel that is like P2 (norwegian radio channel), but televised wouldn’t be so bad? I skimmed the program list, it makes me feel that the world in general has expectations on how I should be, think and behave as a woman. Expectations that I can’t fulfill. I end up thinking that I, because of those silly double X chromosomes really should be interested in paranormal phenomenons and «big love». It’s like there’s an agenda where the ultimate goal is to reshape those decaying gender stereotypes and create some new ones, nice stereotypes where women, no matter how smart and independent they seem, really are little girls who just want to sit down in the sofa, eat ice cream and watch a good dating program.
I guess it’s a comfort that noone seems to be watching it, and that according to the previously mentioned article: «The tv3 airing of the Champion’s League-match Porto-Liverpool actually had more female viewers than FEM’s most viewed program so far.»
But then there’s the general tendency that the tv-channel is following. Where you can’t find raingear for a five year old girl in any other colour than pink. Where the separation of the way the kindergarden children play is much more severe than when I was little, because the girls are wearing skirts that are a bit too long, and a bit too likely to fall off, and that are pretty, and that shouldn’t get dirty. Last year, I had a kindergarden outside my window, and for fun, I counted the children and made a little statistic in my head. 26 children. 14 boys/12 girls. Only one of the girls were wearing trousers. Girls play quietly and cleanly. It makes me wonder what went wrong.
I have this little book at home, called something like «how we create the women». It’s nice and brown and from the 70’s. A bit outdated, and sometimes when reading it, i’m giggling. I know that social constructivism isn’t too trendy these days. I know that there is research these days, showing us that the male and the female brain works differently, and I know that perhaps as a result of all that brain research the current norm is more essensialistic, – that one should accept that girls are born with a set of girly characteristics. I know that «we shouldn’t try and make the girls into boys. We should let them be girls, like they really are». In a way it sounds reasonable, but when i turn it upside down it feels like it’s not me who’s the social construct, but them. That they are creating a generation of little princesses, just to protest against the jeans and corduroys we grew up with ourself.
It might be. But I really don’t like it.