Double standards are unfair, unnecessary, and stupid. So why do we enforce these insane ideas everyday? It is okay for x to do z, but when y tries to do z? Well that is simply unacceptable. Replace x and y with any race, religion or group of people you can think of. Therein lie our engrained, not-so-subconscious stereotypes and the less conspicuous role of societal expectations.
Now, apply double standards to gender. We’re all aware of the false “gender expectations” for guys and girls. Guys like sports and girls like shopping, right? Ladies love the gallant “make me a sandwich” line as much as guys love hearing that they’re overly sensitive. If you take anything away from this jumble of words floating around on the Internet, let it be that double standards and the stereotypes that create them are stupid.
In today’s Battle of the Sexes we will explore double standards in the field of dating and figure out – who has it worse?
1. Promiscuity: “Pimpin” vs. “Easy”
This one is well-known. If a guy sleeps around, he gets high-fives. If a girl sleeps around, she gets called trashy. Why are there so many words like “sl*t” and “wh*re” directed toward women, but none for men? Maybe it isn’t this black and white; maybe it is something biological about men planting seeds and women having limited amounts of fertilizer? (Uncomfortable analogy, sorry). Either way, this double standard is still evident in the millenial generation.
- Chicks: 1 pt.
2. Flirting: “Creep” vs. “Friendly”
Girls, the answer is no. Just because a guy smiles and acts friendly, it does not always mean he is hitting on you. This misconception is one that lands men in trouble often:
“He was totally hitting on me.”
“What a creep.”
First of all, a guy hitting on you is not creepy, it’s flattering (assuming he isn’t sexually harassing you). Second of all, he was probably just being a nice person.
Now, on the other hand, if a girl acts kindly, she is just…being nice? Let’s establish that girls and guys can both be friendly without flirting, “creeps” and “non-creeps” alike.
- D*cks: 1 pt.
3. Chivalry: “Romantic” vs. “Roma-no-thanks”
From my own experience, I can say chivalry is not dead. There do exist men in the world who want to take the romantic reigns and enchant us ladies. Still, where draws the line between chivalrous and overly-sweet? This dilemma is what made Marnie leave Charlie and drove Rory Gilmore into the arms of bad*ss Jess Mariano.
It is also remains true in our progressive society that guys are supposed to pick up the tab on a date. Ladies aren’t complaining – but it still seems a little unfair.
- D*cks: 1 pt.
4. Fashion: “Acceptable” vs. “Scandalous”
Guy wears clothes revealing chiseled muscles: acceptable. Girl wears clothes revealing her chest, mid-drift, legs: scandalous? The social norms are forever changing in the realm of fashion, but the general judgments seem to have little variation: Girls that show off their figure are seen as objects, though the same is untrue for guys.
On another fashionable note, girls have some unspoken expectation to look “cute” at all times. Guys can pass in a t-shirt and sweats, but girls cannot. We thank you, yoga pants, for giving us a middle ground, but the real truth is that clothes are clothes – and we should probably care a lot less about them for both sexes.
- Chicks: 1 pt.
5. Authority: “Boss” vs. “Passive”
If your boss is a guy and he orders everyone around, he’s good at his job. Take the same scenario and replace the guy with a woman. Is she a b*tch? This double standard holds true in relationships and dating as well. If a guy takes control, he’s fulfilling his mucho-macho-mustachio-ness. When a girl does the same, she could be considered bossy or controlling. Should she be passive, docile and obedient? I imagine a 2008 Ne-Yo would argue no, Miss Independent.
- Chicks: 1 pt.
Final Score: Chicks 3, D*cks 2.
I apologize for gross overgeneralizations throughout this article. Comments are welcome!