Illustration
צילום: איי פי
It's hard to take big steps while wearing a skirt
Restriction of movement has always been an effective way to prevent equal rights for women. In the past, when women’s clothing was less functional, the woman was limited. Today there are sex offenders
One day last week I went out early in the morning to hike in the mountains. I spent two hours in the depths of the wadis and the heights of the peaks. And then I thought to myself that I was lucky to be a man.
A woman would not dare go out by herself in the mountains, especially not so early in the morning. I thought that it does not matter how much we fight for equality between the sexes, there will not be equality in freedom of movement. Women get to enjoy the natural resources of this country less than men.
I read the figures compiled by the Ministry of Industry and Trade in honor of International Women’s Day, and I ask what is more outrageous - the restriction of a woman’s movement in the mountains, or the violation of her rights to equal wages and equal opportunity in the workplace.
Working women earn on average 58 percent less than men; the rate of women in management positions is half that of men; the rate of women who work in high tech, a field where the salaries are very high, is about a quarter of the rate for men in this lucrative field. Despite the growing number of women in the business world, women are still concentrated in the traditionally female occupations, such as teaching, office work and nursing.
The situation is definitely not equal, but it can be fixed: A law here or there, combined with some personal decisions, and the problem could be solved. But how, in contrast, can you fix the fact that a woman does not have the same freedom of movement as a man? Which woman is willing to hike by herself in the mountains?
A problem of public funding
A few days later I went walking at night in the meticulously kept park by the Yarkon river. There were well-kept and well-lit paths, and a few people strolling or sitting intimately on the benches.
Again I wondered about freedom of movement. The municipality of Tel Aviv has spent millions of public shekels, for the good of men and women, but only women have to think twice before going by themselves to the park at night; they also enjoy less of the public money than men.
A woman’s freedom of movement is limited due to criminal acts. It only takes a few criminal men to limit the movement of all the women who want to partake of the mountain air or the lights on the Yarkon. It is upsetting, it is ugly, it is intolerable, but apparently it is not an essential matter. How can you compare the right to walk alone with discrimination in the workplace? And yet, you can compare the two. There is even a connection.
This century’s crinoline
There were times, not so long ago, when freedom of movement was restricted not by criminals, but by woman’s clothing. For example, in Europe in the nineteenth century women wore crinolines - a skirt made up of a steel contraption that had many layers of skirts on it.
The fashion was to exaggerate the thigh area, in order to show off an hour glass figure and a rich husband who could afford to finance her fleet of servants to help her get around. This fashionable woman had difficulty moving around on her own. She would bump into things, could not always go down stairs by herself, and would tire easily. Such a woman would not go far from home.
The girdle worn in those days in Europe would complete the matter. It was made from a reinforced weave of whalebone or iron and steel hoops and was tied tightly in the back, with the help of a servant obviously. You did not need more than this to cut off the blood circulation in the body. A few dance steps, or a few steps outside the house, and the woman would swoon.
Limiting freedom of movement has always been an efficient way to prevent equal rights for women. The less functional a women’s clothing was, the more restricted she was in riding a horse, going to work, hiking in nature or enjoying sports. Today we have sex offenders. The thought that a man can do whatever he pleases to a woman is the crinoline of the 21st century.
A social background to criminal thoughts
Freedom of movement is a characteristic of the equality in value of mankind. For example, you can predict by the growing number of female drivers in the Arab and Ultra-Orthodox sector, that soon they will also enjoy equal rights.
Just as in the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century the invention of bicycles accelerated a feminist revolution, where women exchanged their cumbersome wardrobe for light weight skirts and pants which were more comfortable to walk and ride in.
And so in this context, here is my prediction: As long as a woman does not have the freedom to wander around on her own in any place at any time, as men do, she will continue to get a lower salary and enjoy less of the equal opportunities at work. The two are related. Discrimination in the workplace enables a criminal approach towards a woman’s body. A boss who discriminates against female workers contributes to a social atmosphere that in the end deprives a woman the rights to travel on her own in secluded places.
But, and this is an important but, there is a different end to my hike in the mountains that early morning: I saw a woman walking towards me, alone on the path. I said good morning to her, and she replied with a confident voice. On the horizon, I already saw the difference.
