Captainess Of Your Own Ship

As a gay man, I am often confused by the notion of striving for equal rights. It's not the equal part that is confusing. It's the striving.

On one hand, there is a need to identify with a cultural brand, e.g. gay. On the other hand, there is a quest for rights that everyone else has. With that, is also a quest for opportunities, and the subsequent success and power that others possess.

These two forces contradict each other. For example, I noticed when reading about a Mr. Gay America pageant, one of the organizers alluded that if straight females can do it, so can we.

My response, is why do you want to take your unique culture and mirror it against another? Does this create equality or does it create following? If it’s following, is this disguised abdication?

Giving the benefit of the doubt, perhaps there are no original ideas to create or original identities to own. Hence, outside of discriminating factors, such as sexual orientation, race, religion, color, or genetic indicators, we are all human with the same needs. Therefore, all notions of equality are universally the same. If this is the case, then there is no box to break out of outside of the one we create for ourselves. If this is true, then it does not matter what discriminating trait you carry. Each of us individually has to strive for equal rights and opportunities on our own terms. Each of us decides our own definition of success and power.

This comes to mind because a few weeks ago I was asked to read the manifesto, The 6 Rules Women Must Break In Order To Succeed, (Flynn, Heath, Holt, 2011) and to write my thoughts on it for the website, Women Of HR.  After reading it, I felt a little confused. I couldn’t escape the notion that their definitions of power were built upon structures of power already in existence, and success was based on having more power. Also, it seemed the very structure they claim is holding them back, is the same one they want to embrace. Thus, I found instead of creating truly new rules, they were suggesting to follow rules already in place.

I don’t disagree with the six rules for someone seeking their definition of power. However, I had difficulty not applying their rules to anyone who was seeking this power regardless of whether they were women or men. I agree, for example, one should not “focus on everyone else”, or “expect hard work to be enough”, or “fall into extreme thinking.”

However, I do think the rules are limiting. I am not one to tell someone else what success or power is. Both of these are individual choices. Hence, my negative criticism of the manifesto is of the narrow band of which success is defined. I read nothing that illuminated the internal beauty of feeling free to choose your own level of success. For me, that is when true power comes into play.

Frankly though, I was hoping to discover some true insights into some different rules for women. I was hoping it would resemble this quote from Alison Maitland, co-author of "Why Women Mean Business" when she said, "We shouldn't be fixing the women but the system." Thus, before reading the manifesto, I was anticipating something iconoclastic like rock music singer, Patti Smith. Instead, I was left with Pat Benatar. Neither bad. Simply, one was the captainess of their own ship and broke the rules; the other one was a captive of the ship, and followed the rules.

To me, if you wish to truly create new rules: take charge of yourself, create your own definitions of success and power, and be the captain of your own ship.

Pat...

or Patti...

You choose.