Why are we criticising women for showing emotions?
In a worrying new trend, the media have started to chastise women for displays of emotion.
According to historians, hysteria is the first “mental health” condition attributed to women. Symptoms included: a fondness of writing, feeling depressed, sexually forward behaviour and even infertility. Because, you know, that’s something we can control. Nowadays, hysterical is a term used to describe an overt display of extreme emotion and it’s often used as a deregotary way of describing a woman who is feeling any type of way. Women are called hysterical when they get angry over a cheating partner, or when they cry about their sexist boss‘ inappropriate workplace conduct. These days, rather than being a name for a (albeit incorrect) medical condition, it’s an insult. Society has never been comfortable with women displaying any kind of emotion, and it’s getting worse.
Recently, there’s been a very public criticism of two women for having emotions. First up, Love Island’s Tasha Ghouri. The dancer, who had a Ross and Rachel style on-again-off-again relationship with human wet lettuce Andrew Le Page, was critiqued by her fellow islanders for having a “dramatic” reaction to being one of the least popular couples on the show after a public vote. Despite being saved from being booted off the island, Tasha broke down in tears, stating that the public reaction to her had knocked her confidence. Luca Bish, a misogynistic woman hater disguised as a Jack-the-lad fishmonger, was absolutely befuddled as to why she was upset, and made his feelings very clear when he questioned why she was crying. In doing so, he made it clear that he didn’t think she was entitled to have any feelings about this or, perhaps, he just wasn’t comfortable with her showing them.
Another example is England footballer Jill Scott. During a clash with a German player she yelled “f**k off you f**king p***k”, and despite the team going on to secure victory, an unnecessary amount of the media attention was focused on this minor moment. She was criticised for being a terrible role model to young girls and was urged to behave in a more ladylike manor. Women aren’t allowed to get angry - not in public at least. They’re meant to be soft and demure; leave the anger (and the sport, come to think of it) to the men. Yes, swearing isn’t allowed in football - women’s or men’s - but the uproar was focused on the fact that it was a woman who had uttered the profanity, not the act itself. The fact that she had released her anger with an expletive and not kept it hidden was what angered the small-minded public, and it is fucking ridiculous.
When men display anger in sport, the public are right behind them, cheering them on when things get heated with the opposition. When men show their vulnerability and shed a tear, they’re applauded for dismantling the stereotypes of men not being allowed to cry. I am wholeheartedly behind the second point, but it‘s unfair to congratulate men for crying and mock women who do the same.
So why are we so uncomfortable with women showing their emotions? Or more accurately, why are men so uncomfortable? On a basic level, it harks back to childhood - men are raised to hide their emotions and “stay strong”. This narrative is thankfully changing, but this mentality is still prevalent in many generations. So, when men encounter extreme emotions they become uncomfortable, because they don’t know how to handle them. Men are also less familiar with, and typically less skilled in, talking about their own feelings, so they feel disadvantaged when encountering emotional people (Weiss, 2021). Now this of course is a generalisation, but it could explain why some men react in such a negative way to displays of emotion. They simply aren’t equipped to deal with it, thanks to not being raised with the skills or experience to do so.
Whatever the reasons, if we’re not careful, we’ll soon be back to the dark days of locking women up in institutions for displaying too many extreme emotions. Did somebody say lobotomy?