Violin Shop MeToo

I recently returned from this year's Violin Society of America convention in Cleveland.  I had a great time, and am looking forward to writing a post about my experiences soon, but first I wanted to share my part of a panel discussion I was privileged to be a part of.

We got to talking at last year's convention during the women's luncheon (which is a nice place for women in the industry to connect since there are so few of us) about what we experience in terms of discrimination.  The esteemed Marilyn Wallin gave a brave speech about some of the things she's endured, including a man tearing up a check for an instrument of hers after he discovered a woman had built it and then declared the idea too disgusting to contemplate, to the fact that women in the early days of the violin making schools were not allowed to build cellos.  (She had to hire one of the male students to teach her.  Marilyn currently makes some of the best damn cellos on the planet.)  

It sparked quite a conversation as everyone began to share their own stories.  Everyone has them, which is very much what the MeToo movement has been about.  As we talked over lunch and beyond, I started to ask why we weren't sharing these stories with men.  We know all these problems are ubiquitous.  It's men who do not.

So we decided to put together a panel discussion for the next convention, and we collected stories that women were too uncomfortable to attach their names to and edited them enough to provide anonymity.  I wrote the intro, my friend Robyn read the stories, and Marilyn contributed a new piece before I read a closing, and then we turned the discussion over to the audience.  The only real stumbling block we had was that various people in charge of organizing the talks at the convention kept trying to change our panel into one about general diversity, at one point promoting it as "How to Bring Diversity to Your Shop!" which struck me as a terrible bait and switch that would understandably upset people. I tried to address the diversity issue a bit (which is incredibly important, just not what we were doing), but was relieved when the wording was changed in the program before it went to print, and finally read "Panel Discussion: Experiences of Discrimination in the Workplace."

For anyone who is interested but couldn't attend the VSA convention this year, here is my talk:

Defining Women and Men

There are times when I feel like as a society we are getting on a more enlightened track about gender issues.  That there is a broader range available to people about what is tolerated or even acceptable when it comes to personal expression of gender and it makes me glad.

Then a media story will spark the debate anew and people, even people I like and respect, will start writing reactions that I don't agree with or even fully understand.  The most recent example to catch my attention was back at the end of last year when there was a story on Fox about how men aren't as interested in marriage currently because women essentially do too much for themselves, and a blogger I admire agreed, saying it made sense to her since, "Women aren't women anymore."

I think about gender issues a lot.  I find them fascinating.  There are so many variables that impact how we think about gender including culture, history, technology, tradition, fashion, science, religion, sexual orientation, biology, parenting....  Some elements seem fixed, others fluid.  The questions about what is masculine and feminine, and what is male and female, are so obvious on the surface, until you start to break it all down.  Under close examination very little is obvious, and all of it is interesting.

When I was in high school I had a biology teacher who gave us an assignment to write down two lists: one of characteristics that were masculine and one of characteristics that were feminine.  The catch was we were not allowed to include any characteristics that were physical.  It seems like an easy assignment until you really start to think about it.  To this day I am still thinking about it.  (Now that's a good high school biology teacher.)

If physical strength is discounted as a defining characteristic, as is anything delicate in appearance, where do you go next?  I suppose I would say at this point in my life that I see boys and men as generally more reckless, but is a cautious and sensible man less of a man?  No.  And whether or not a woman is more of a risk taker has little to do with if she's perceived as feminine in my opinion.  (I suppose it depends on what kind of risks.)

Men as protectors comes up a lot.  And yet, if you need the ultimate example of ferocity in the service of being protective isn't it always of a mother bear defending her cubs?  The most basic view of a good mother, which by definition is the most feminine role one can hold, is of a woman who will protect her children at any cost.  Is she stepping over into masculine territory at that point, or is that fundamentally feminine because it is so basic?

Women as nurturing also comes up.  And yet I personally don't know any man who when given the opportunity to be involved in the life of a child finds himself incapable of caring for one.  Just because traditionally men may not have often been as involved with child rearing does not mean they aren't up to the task.  My children are lucky to have a stay at home parent as kind and patient as my husband.  And no way in hell is he less of a man for being there for them.

Here is where I think the real problem with the discussion lies: