A Running Commentary

Pulitzer Prize winning author Susan Faludi’s latest book, The Terror Dream, cites a “truly disturbing” trend she finds in American gender equality. Namely, the tendency of women to become more “feminine and traditional” post 9/11, allowing men to slip back into the role of protector.

Speaking at the Susan B. Anthony House’s annual birthday event yesterday, Ms. Faludi noted, “The national culture at large responded to the attacks in ways that were largely disturbing”, bemoaning “even when women seem to make progress, there are deep undercurrents that never seem to go away.”

Not being a woman myself, I recognize the need to tread softly on this topic. However, it does puzzle me that a natural reaction of women to a global event as unprecedented as 9/11 should be attributed to a disturbing undercurrent. Given the magnitude and simultaneous immediacy of the event, isn’t 9/11 perhaps the ripest opportunity in modern history to plumb humans’ most base and natural dispositions?

Is it not possible that a natural disposition of many females (it is unnecessary to assert all) might be to look to males as protectors? After all, we’re not discussing forced subservience, abuse, or other historical degradations here. No one is insinuating that such a natural bent, be it genetic or otherwise, must be accompanied by a demoted standing in society or a limitation of equality. Why is that a woman can’t be have a symbiotic relationship with a man where equality accompanies honored recognition of differing roles?