The Must Have Accessory

Listening to: Franklin - Paramore

Mood: Content

Ok, so in about 3months I will be attending my Year 12 formal where everyone brings out the big guns; gorgeous dresses, fabulous hair and make-up, spectacular jewelry and of course, who can forget, the hunk-a-spunk partner that's the cherry on top, the accessory of all accessories. But my lack of choices for the latter has led me to begin to think of society's emphasis on the need for females to depend on males.

Way back when women were suppressed by men, women fought for our rights, to equal our stances in society, to remove ourselves from the patriarchal society, not completely, but enough for independence. Sure, many rights have been amended, and independence, well for the most part, we have that too. Virginia Woolf's treatise A Room Of One's Own highlights the obstacles women in the 1900's faced, many of which have been amended, so why have women returned to their dependence on men?

Sure, it's not exactly dependence as such by comparison to the 1900's. Woolf's thesis was that for independence women "must have money and a room of her own", that's not a problem these days. Women don't necessarily depend on men to be the bread winners anymore, and a "room of her own", well I've heard of many single women living in apartments alone. We're almost reflecting Edward Albee's argument in his play Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf? that both sexes need each other, but not in the "normal" sense, but need in the sense of using them for personal gain. These days, women and men alike USE the opposite sex as an accessory.

The opposite sex is, as mentioned above, the accessory of all accessories. It's flaunted like no other accessory, and is the most highly demanded. But all for what? I'm not going to step to the side and not take a hit for being a victim of this new wave of obsession, but I want to question why. Why is it important?

A friend once said to me, I'm paraphrasing here, that women to him were mere accessories. This took me by shock, especially when he said he had a few girlfriends, at the same time. As I've mentioned in previous posts, I'm not a fan of polygamy, I'm all for monogamy. But the word "accessory" really hurt me.

What do people get out of having "accessory" boyfriends or girlfriends?

Last year for my Year 11 social I took this guy I really liked and I had the time of my life as it was girls from my grade, my classmates there with me celebrating the end of another year. My partner, however, sat there and played on his Blackberry/Palm all night. Now quite frankly I had no problem with that as afterward we went and hung out together, and I had a lot of fun with my friends, but clearly he did not. So what are the chances that if I took him again he'd enjoy himself? I must admit, I'm guilty, I've already asked him if he'd come with me. But why did I? What will I get out of him being bored out of his mind? A final dance at the end of night perhaps? Or to get a picture, not on my own, but with a man by my side?

Another frequently debated topic in relation to the formal would be "who pays for the partner's ticket?" For me, I'm a firm believer the invitee pays for the partner, but with that in mind, if they don't have a suit then that's for them to deal with. This leads me into another frustration I'm having, this time with the "new age man" who believes that they don't need to pay for their dates/partners/girls. As I've said, I don't mind whipping out and paying, to tell you the truth, I feel bad about seeing people pay for me, girls or guys alike. With that said, I get frustrated when a guy doesn't even make the offer and assumes it's your shout.

Now, I have this gentleman of a friend who pays for absolutely EVERYTHING. I'm talking EVERYTHING. Movie tickets, dinner, any food or drinks. Basically, if I'm with him, he'll pay. On the other hand, I know this other guy who's not so generous. The first, he's the older end of Gen Y, and the latter, the younger half of Gen Y. So have the times changed so severely in less then a decade between the two?

xx