Mismeasure of Woman

1. The "Universal Male" Standard Distorts Our Understanding of Women

In almost every domain of life, men are considered the normal human being, and women are “ab-normal,” deficient because they are different from men.

Male as the norm. Society often uses men as the standard against which women are measured, leading to the perception that women are "abnormal" or deficient when they differ from this norm. This bias is evident in various fields, from medicine and psychology to history and economics.

Examples of male bias:

• In medicine, the male body is often the default model, with female anatomy treated as a separate, specialized case.
• In history, the achievements of men are often presented as the norm, while women's contributions are marginalized or ignored.
• In psychology, male behavior is often used to define what is "normal," leading to the pathologizing of women's experiences.

Consequences of the male standard. This ingrained way of thinking leads women to constantly worry about "measuring up," often resulting in self-doubt, low self-esteem, and a feeling of inadequacy. It also perpetuates the idea that women's experiences are somehow less valid or important than men's.

2. Celebrating "Female" Traits Can Be as Limiting as Denigrating Them

Proponents of this view emphasize aspects of female experience or female “nature”—such as menstruation, childbirth, compassion, spirituality, cooperation, pacifism, and harmony with the environment—and celebrate them as being morally superior to men’s experiences and qualities.

The trap of "female superiority." While it's important to challenge negative stereotypes about women, simply reversing the hierarchy and claiming that women are "superior" can be just as limiting. This approach still uses men as the standard, even if the judgments are kinder.

Problems with essentializing female traits:

• It reinforces the idea that women are defined by their biology or "nature," rather than by their individual experiences and choices.
• It can lead to new forms of oppression, such as pronatalist pressures on women to have children.
• It can create a false dichotomy between "masculine" and "feminine" qualities, ignoring the fact that both sexes are capable of a wide range of behaviors and emotions.

Moving beyond polarities. Instead of trying to define women as either "inferior" or "superior" to men, we should focus on expanding our understanding of human potential and creating a society that values the full range of human qualities, regardless of gender.

3. "Sameness" Doesn't Equal Equality: Recognizing Real Differences Matters

By ignoring the differences that do exist between men and women—in life experiences, resources, power, and reproductive processes—the basically-alike school assumes that it is safe to generalize from the male standard to all women.

The fallacy of "sameness." The idea that equality requires treating men and women as if they were the same ignores the real differences that exist between them, particularly in terms of power, resources, and reproductive processes. This approach often leads to unfair and unequal outcomes for women.

Examples of unequal outcomes:

• In medicine, research based solely on men can lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment for women.
• In law, treating men and women the same can ignore the unique challenges women face, such as domestic violence and unequal pay.
• In the workplace, policies that assume all workers have the same needs can disadvantage women who are also primary caregivers.

"Different but equal." True equality requires recognizing and valuing the differences between men and women, while ensuring that these differences do not lead to discrimination or disadvantage. This means creating systems and policies that are responsive to the diverse needs and experiences of all people.

4. The Medicalization of Women's Bodies: Normal Processes as Diseases

They have made sicknesses and syndromes of women’s normal bodily processes, and “diseases” of women’s normal experiences.

The female body as a problem. Normal female bodily processes, such as menstruation and menopause, are often pathologized and treated as diseases, reflecting a bias that views the female body as inherently flawed or deficient. This medicalization of women's bodies has significant consequences for their health and well-being.

Examples of medical bias:

• Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is often treated as a disease, despite the fact that many women experience normal hormonal fluctuations without significant distress.
• Menopause is often viewed as a deficiency state, leading to the widespread use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), even when it may not be necessary or beneficial.
• Medical research often excludes women, leading to a lack of understanding of how diseases and treatments affect them differently than men.

Reclaiming the female body. It's important to recognize that women's bodies are not inherently "sick" or "diseased." We need to challenge the medicalization of normal female experiences and promote a more holistic and empowering approach to women's health.

5. Misdiagnosing the Mind: "Sick" Women vs. Men with "Problems"

Why women are “sick” but men have “problems”

The pathologizing of women's emotions. When women exhibit behaviors or emotions that deviate from the male norm, they are often labeled as "sick" or "disordered," while men with similar issues are seen as having "problems" that are often attributed to external factors. This double standard reflects a bias that views women's experiences as inherently pathological.

Examples of misdiagnosis:

• Women who are unhappy or lack self-esteem are often diagnosed with "self-defeating personality disorder," while men with similar issues are seen as having "problems" with their careers or relationships.
• Women who are overly concerned with the needs of others are often labeled as "codependent," while men who are emotionally distant are seen as having "problems" with intimacy.
• Women who are depressed are often seen as having a mental illness, while men who are depressed are seen as having a "problem" with stress or work.

Challenging the double standard. We need to challenge the tendency to pathologize women's experiences and recognize that both sexes are capable of a wide range of emotions and behaviors. We also need to acknowledge that social and economic factors play a significant role in shaping mental health.

6. The Power of Narrative: How Stories Shape Our Understanding of Gender

Personality traits, abilities, values, motivations, roles, dreams, and desires: all vary across culture and history, and depend on time and place, context and situation.

Stories shape reality. The stories we tell about ourselves and others play a powerful role in shaping our understanding of gender. These narratives, often repeated in popular culture and media, can reinforce stereotypes and limit our perceptions of what is possible for men and women.

Examples of limiting narratives:

• The "hero's journey," which often excludes women from the central role of protagonist.
• The "damsel in distress" narrative, which portrays women as passive and dependent on men for rescue.
• The "male breadwinner" narrative, which assumes that men are primarily responsible for financial support and women for domestic duties.

Challenging limiting narratives. By becoming aware of the power of narrative, we can begin to challenge limiting stereotypes and create new stories that reflect the full range of human experience. This means recognizing that gender is not a fixed or essential quality, but a social construct that is shaped by culture, history, and individual choices.

7. Love's Unequal Playing Field: Women as Experts, Men as Victims

How women cornered the love market

The feminization of love. In modern society, women are often seen as the "experts" in love and relationships, while men are portrayed as emotionally inept or incapable of intimacy. This stereotype, while seemingly flattering to women, actually reinforces a power imbalance that disadvantages both sexes.

Consequences of the feminization of love:

• It places the burden of emotional labor on women, who are expected to manage the feelings and relationships of everyone around them.
• It excuses men from taking responsibility for their own emotional development and participation in intimate relationships.
• It perpetuates the idea that men are incapable of expressing or understanding emotions, leading to a cycle of misunderstanding and frustration.

Redefining love. We need to move beyond the narrow, gendered definitions of love and recognize that both sexes are capable of expressing and experiencing love in a variety of ways. This means valuing both emotional expression and practical acts of care, and challenging the idea that one is inherently superior to the other.

8. Beyond Opposites: Embracing Complexity and Context in Gender

My goal is to expand our visions of normalcy, not to replace a male-centered view with a female-centered one.

The limitations of binary thinking. The tendency to view gender as a set of opposing categories (masculine vs. feminine, rational vs. emotional, independent vs. dependent) obscures the complexity and diversity of human experience. This binary thinking perpetuates stereotypes and limits our understanding of both sexes.

The importance of context. Behavior is not solely determined by gender; it is also shaped by context, culture, power, and individual experiences. By recognizing the influence of these factors, we can move beyond simplistic explanations of sex differences and develop a more nuanced understanding of human behavior.

Embracing complexity. Instead of trying to fit people into rigid categories, we should embrace the complexity and diversity of human experience. This means recognizing that both men and women are capable of a wide range of behaviors and emotions, and that there is no single "right" way to be.

Last updated: January 22, 2025