Has the world fundamentally misunderstood women?

“A lot of people will wonder, did you two meet just because you’re the same age and have a lot in common… stuff there?” This is a New Zealand reporter last month, speaking to two world leaders; Sanna Marin from Finland and Jacinda Ardern from New Zealand, who held a press conference in Auckland to discuss their historic meeting (Marin is the first Finnish prime minister to visit the country). The reporter’s request was quickly turned down by Ardern, who asked if anyone had the same “wonder” about Barack Obama and one of his own predecessors, John Key, who were born within days of each other.

“Because two women meet, not just because of their gender,” he says.

“We met because we are the prime minister,” concluded Marin.

Dave RowlandGetty’s image

What transpired at this press conference was a clear moment – ​​however unintentional – of everyday sexism. It is such a commonplace existence in our lives, whether we are world leaders or not, that it is taken for granted, as if uttered with a sigh of despair. That’s why it wasn’t just the reporter’s ludicrous question (pause, please, for her awkwardly chosen euphemism: “stuff”) that caught my eye, but what we saw Arden and Marin patiently, fully equipped, muster in response: a women’s defense.

I firmly believe that explaining women – explaining women to men – has become an important task; necessary ointment for difficult times. Many men, it turns out, really need it. For what other explanation could there be for a reporter who deigned to ask two world leaders if the reason for their meeting might have been their age, their “ordinary things”? What did he imagine this was possible? Sharing a giggle diary to see if their periods are in sync? Comparison of bra sizes? A bottle of wine and a debate about which world leader they liked at the last UN meeting?

What we have here is a fundamental misconception about women, plain and simple. Even the most sinister misogyny imposed on women globally, every day, begins with this important premise. Just look at the work Meghan Markle does on her podcast Archetypes. However you feel about her, the premise is sound: we have, for centuries, misunderstood women and then labeled them unfairly. Even at its extreme – the barbaric policies against women in Iran or Afghanistan – we see that this is, in its most basic form, the inability of men to understand women, or even a refusal to try.

We’ve seen countless examples where women’s complaints were needed just this year. Take the state’s Roe v Wade reversal – a decision that has dire consequences not only for women’s liberties and rights in the state, but also for their medical safety. So many of these decisions are made by male legislators who make laws about women’s bodies. The placard-friendly phrase “no uterus, no opinions” may seem trite, but when sans uterus it makes no effort to develop an empathetic understanding of what it’s like to have one, it’s remarkably accurate.

Stephanie KeithGetty’s image

This proved painful in the group’s viral TikTok campaign Roe V Bros last month in America, which saw women conduct vox pop interviews with men on topics ranging from menstrual care to pregnancy. The results are laughable (some men believe a woman uses one tampon during her period) and equally terrifying. The aim is to show that these men know nothing about women’s bodies, and will vote in the midterm elections, where women’s bodies are at stake.

This content is imported from TikTok. You may be able to find the same content in other formats, or you may be able to find more information on their website.

Or maybe we just need to look to comments made by Polish politician Jarosław Kaczyński last month, who blamed the low birth rate on “women who drink too much”. Or perhaps we should look, once again, at the insignificant reactions to Sarah Everard’s death and the outrage over women’s safety that has been largely ignored – or worse, the responses, such as women being asked to stay the night, which were gloriously and offensively missed. the main thing is.

The idea of ​​a woman complaining may evoke laughter, but it speaks to a serious problem — one that is often fatal. What we have here is a huge global understanding gap between men and women, the latter having policies and political decisions made about their lives by those who do not understand their experience. Most of it is, yes, about the people in the room; lack of women in decision-making positions, scarcity of female leadership. We focus on this, I think, the cost of fixing the broader problem. Addressing the lack of parity in leadership roles is necessary, but it is simply sticking a plaster in a gaping wound left untreated for thousands of years.

For the bigger issue here is rampant misunderstanding of women. We are still so different from society that we remain a “minority”, a special case, a deviation from the norm. As long as our shortcomings as humans are seen as ‘male’, we will suffer the consequences of micro-aggressions, discrimination, stupid investigations that require women to complain. The result of this misunderstanding is a world where laws are made about our bodies, in which too many people still lack the curiosity or common sense to realize that people’s bodies are entitled to the same life and freedoms as they are. When those who misunderstand us, who don’t want to understand us, are the ones responsible for our safety, our prospects, our lives, we face a serious problem.

Friends, we also have “things in common” with you. Come on, let’s explain….