Выбрать главу

an awesome, fearful iceberg: an extreme and visible

expression of romantic attitudes, processes, and

values organically rooted in all cultures, then and

now. It demonstrates that man’s love for woman, his

sexual adoration of her, his human definition of her,

his delight and pleasure in her, require her negation:

physical crippling and psychological lobotomy. That is

the very nature of romantic love, which is the love based

on polar role definitions, manifest in herstory as well

as in fiction —he glories in her agony, he adores her

deformity, he annihilates her freedom, he will have her

as sex object, even if he must destroy the bones in her

feet to do it. Brutality, sadism, and oppression emerge

as the substantive core of the romantic ethos. That ethos

is the warp and woof of culture as we know it.

Women should be beautiful. All repositories of

cultural wisdom from King Solomon to King Hefner

agree: women should be beautiful. It is the reverence

for female beauty which informs the romantic ethos,

gives it its energy and justification. Beauty is transformed into that golden ideal, Beauty —rapturous and abstract. Women must be beautiful and Woman is

Beauty.

Notions o f beauty always incorporate the whole of a

Gynocide: Chinese Footbinding

113

given societal structure, are crystallizations o f its values.

A society with a well-defined aristocracy will have aristocratic standards o f beauty. In Western “democracy”

notions o f beauty are “democratic” : even if a woman is

not born beautiful, she can make herself attractive.

T h e argument is not simply that some women are

not beautiful, therefore it is not fair to ju d ge women on

the basis o f physical beauty; or that men are not judged

on that basis, therefore women also should not be

judged on that basis; or that men should look for character in women; or that our standards o f beauty are too parochial in and o f themselves; or even that judgin g

women according to their conformity to a standard o f

beauty serves to make them into products, chattels,

differing from the farmer's favorite cow only in terms o f

literal form. The issue at stake is different, and crucial.

Standards o f beauty describe in precise terms the relationship that an individual will have to her own body.

They prescribe her mobility, spontaneity, posture,

gait, the uses to which she can put her body. They define

precisely the dimensions of her physical freedom. And, o f

course, the relationship between physical freedom and

psychological development, intellectual possibility, and

creative potential is an umbilical one.

In our culture, not one part o f a woman’s body is

left untouched, unaltered. No feature or extremity is

spared the art, or pain, o f improvement. Hair is dyed,

lacquered, straightened, permanented; eyebrows are

plucked, penciled, dyed; eyes are lined, mascaraed,

shadowed; lashes are curled, or false —from head to

toe, every feature o f a woman's face, every section o f

her body, is subject to modification, alteration. This al­

114

Woman Hating

teration is an ongoing, repetitive process. It is vital to

the economy, the major substance of male-female role

differentiation, the most immediate physical and psychological reality of being a woman. From the age of 11 or 12 until she dies, a woman will spend a large part

of her time, money, and energy on binding, plucking,

painting, and deodorizing herself. It is commonly and

wrongly said that male transvestites through the use of

makeup and costuming caricature the women they

would become, but any real knowledge of the romantic

ethos makes clear that these men have penetrated to the

core experience of being a woman, a romanticized construct.

The technology of beauty, and the message it carries, is handed down from mother to daughter. Mother teaches daughter to apply lipstick, to shave under her

arms, to bind her breasts, to wear a girdle and high-

heeled shoes. Mother teaches daughter concomitantly

her role, her appropriate behavior, her place. Mother

teaches daughter, necessarily, the psychology which

defines womanhood: a woman must be beautiful, in

order to please the amorphous and amorous Him. What

we have called the romantic ethos operates as vividly

in 20th-century Amerika and Europe as it did in 10th-

century China.

This cultural transfer o f technology, role, and psychology virtually affects the emotive relationship between mother and daughter. It contributes substantially to the ambivalent love-hate dynamic o f that relationship.

What must the Chinese daughter/child have felt toward

the mother who bound her feet? What does any daughter/child feel toward the mother who forces her to do

Gynocide: Chinese Footbinding

115

painful things to her own body? T h e mother takes on

the role o f enforcer: she uses seduction, command, all

manner o f force to coerce the daughter to conform to

the demands o f the culture. It is because this role becomes her dominant role in the mother-daughter relationship that tensions and difficulties between mothers and daughters are so often unresolvable. T h e daughter

who rejects the cultural norms enforced by the mother

is forced to a basic rejection o f her own mother, a recognition o f the hatred and resentment she felt toward that mother, an alienation from mother and society

so extreme that her own womanhood is denied by both.

T h e daughter who internalizes those values and endorses those same processes is bound to repeat the teaching she was taught —her anger and resentment remain subterranean, channeled against her own female offspring as well as her mother.

Pain is an essential part o f the grooming process,

and that is not accidental. Plucking the eyebrows,

shaving under the arms, wearing a girdle, learning to

walk in high-heeled shoes, having one’s nose fixed,

straightening or curling one’s hair —these things hurt.

The pain, o f course, teaches an important lesson: no

price is too great, no process too repulsive, no operation

too painful for the woman who would be beautiful.

The tolerance of pain and the romanticization of that tolerance begins here, in preadolescence, in socialization, and serves to prepare women for lives o f childbearing, self-abnegation, and husband-pleasing. The adolescent

experience o f the “pain o f being a woman” casts the

feminine psyche into a masochistic mold and forces

the adolescent to conform to a self-image which bases