When I wrote about "The Fabulous Madonna” one of the
Privilege[d] Anonymous wrote to say that I wasn’t one. Wasn’t a lady that is.
And I haven’t forgotten. It
bothered me, despite the typographical errors. Even now, career had, family
fortune fading, I hope to be a lady.
Wait. What is a lady, after all?
Why do we care? Given the emotional charge, I am going to bet that ladyhood can
still matter. However, I do not think we can locate its meaning without some
deconstruction. Without some stakes in the ground.
Random Internet sites say ladies
can’t wear wrinkled clothes, they don’t like airport searches, and they don’t
have dirty hands or feet. Silly and as easily ridiculed as those statements may
be, they point to a larger issue.
My thesis is that the term “Lady”
has become so colonized by different interests that we need a revolution if we
are to continue to use the word.
Definition:
1. arch. A woman in family relationship,
either daughter or wife, to a lord. “Lord,” defined as a man given a title and
land-holding by his king. Lords were the upper class, ladies the women of that
class. (The Apocryphal Privilege[d] Dictionary)
In the centuries since the term
originated, lordship, the signs of upper class status, and the role of women
have all changed beyond recognition. The constants which originally defined
“Lady,” floated, leaving the term itself vulnerable to misuse.
I hope that there’s still reason
to aspire to being a lady. I hope social class status brings with it certain
standards of behavior and taste, but I also wish that women weren’t held to
different standards than men. I wish the term gentleperson had prevailed in
place of “Lady.”
When Social Class Was Rigid, and
Lords Were Lords centuries ago, it was easy to keep track of who was a lord.
Whoever the king said was a lord, that’s who. Eventually, it became possible to
enter the upper class in other ways, at least in America. ‘All men are created
equal’ meant you too could become a lord. Of sorts. George Washington decided
against an aristocracy for the United States. Thanks, Mr. Washington.
Centuries
ago, it was also easy to keep track of who was a lady. Married to a lord? Done.
Have a castle? You’re probably a lady. Horses? Optional. Pearls? Depends on the
plundering abilities of your father, or husband. But once America did away with
lords, the idea of an American ‘lady’ entered free fall. What Do You Mean, No Lord?
If being a lady means belonging
to the upper class, now, several centuries after the American Revolution, women
are ladies independent of their father, or husband. Took a lot longer than
freeing men from their fealty to the king, but there you go. It was tough to
participate in revolutions before birth control.
So this is where we have to use
another charged term. Feminism. We have to say it. Whether one feels feminism
is a good thing, or not, one cannot deny that women may now determine their own
position in class structure. Women don’t have to enter the upper echelons
attached to a man. It’s 2012. I’m not talking here about feminism and private
relationships. That’s your business. I’m talking about social class. The two
things are separate.
If You Can’t Find Her Title, Look
For Her Necklace. So if we aren’t ladies
because of our men, what’s left? Is a lady simple a woman with a lot of money?
They say class in American can be bought. But here I wonder do we even want to
tie the concept of a lady to the usual class parameters – income, wealth,
education, background? If not, and I vote not, we should look for over-reaching
principles.
I vote not to tie the concept of
lady directly to the concept of upper class precisely because the concept of
upper class in America is still in free fall itself. Can class in America be
bought? Is America a meritocracy? Are education,
sophistication, good manners required? Or are we all about power? Those are
bigger questions than I am qualified to answer. Everything I say here is true.
I don’t know if it matters. Let us say that the upper class is privileged, and
leave it at that. For now.
Let us say that ladies act as
though they have learned what privilege can teach. A privileged upbringing
should enable us to live up to some sort of ideal. Because if amassed resources
don’t move us towards whom we believe we should be, then wealth creation and
privilege are nothing but greed. I don’t want to live my short life believing
that human beings organize their societies all around greed. Even if it’s true.
Is ladyhood about the stuff, then?
Yes and no. One of the results of
privilege is often a discerning style, a taste and aesthetic. The desire for
beauty sits in our human core. As soon as we can eat, we paint. Or sing. Or
dance. Sometimes even when food is hard to come by. Aesthetics do matter, and
we hope that a privileged experience of all kinds of beauty develops our larger
understanding.
Ladies should appreciate the
spirit that moves people to art, and should look to broaden, deepen, and refine
their love of things beautiful. The ladyhood aesthetic translates to clothing,
and house decor. Ladies, in my opinion, should have a sensibility for style. I
could be wrong. But let’s say I’m right.
There are two problems with style
and ladyhood. Personal taste is just
that, personal. Of course, I will always feel that my taste is best. It is a
certainly a marker of my upbringing. I apologize in advance, we like to
apologize prophylactically.
It’s a huge leap from preferring
Modigliani to Matisse to the idea that ladies, by definition, must wear
matching pearls. Pearls in their beauty I applaud. Pearls as a signal of a
certain set of political and gender role beliefs I do not care for quite so
much. Lists of ladies’ style often pretend to be about taste, or associated
social class, but slip in too many gender expectations.
The principles of “ladylike”
remain inferred, unstated. To define ladyhood, let’s take a risk and say some
things out loud.
A lady acts the way someone who
has no excuse for bad behavior or bad taste ought to act. And the taste part
should run a distant second to behavior. Aesthetics are not ethics.
How
Do Ladies Behave When They Don’t Have A Castle Any More? I suggest that the primary marker of lady hood
ought to be consideration for the human social contract. A deep understanding
of the balance between social context and beliefs on which you will not
compromise. When interrupting a speaker is a necessary statement of your self,
and when it’s just rude. Good manners are important, protocol only matters when
and where protocol is called for.
Consider others’ feelings, particularly those less fortunate than you.
Respect the mores, values, and protocols of the cultures in which you find
yourself. There may be several. Try to
do the best job you can at any task you undertake. No matter the reward. Develop an aesthetic. Seek out, support,
wear, hang on your walls, the best creations of your fellow humans. Deserve the resources you amass.
What
Does Not A Lady Make? Political
affiliations do not a lady make. The concept of lady hood ought to have weight
beyond politics, beyond what have, quite frankly, been conservative definitions
of women’s roles.
Being
a good person does not a lady make. You can be a good person without respect
for the social context, or a honed aesthetic. But not, in my opinion, a lady.
It’s much more important to be good. But good is a bigger question than lady,
and one I’m no more qualified to address than anyone else in this life.
Wealth
does not a lady make. But you knew that already. I applaud the concept of ladyhood, especially
when we understand that one can be deeply, achingly good without ever
approaching “Lady.” I fear the concept of ladylike. Ladies can take power. No
fair using the threat of not being a “lady” back us down from years of
progress. No fair co-opting a term, one that could have broad meaning, in order
to further sectarian goals. Or we risk implying that women are forever, de
facto, lower class citizens.
My maternal gandmother. Was she a
lady? As far as aesthetics, yes. As far as the rest of it, she tried her best.
We all fail to reach our ideals now and again, or else they aren’t ideals.
