Ladies can be lads

A few weeks ago, the National Union of Students (NUS) launched a report titled ‘That’s What She Said’ on the study of ‘lad’ culture and its effects on gender equality. Today, as ‘lad’ culture has become an inevitable part of university student life, it has also become a focal point in the discussion about gender discrimination and gender equality.

I can appreciate that there are many interpretations to the idea of what is a ‘lad’. But fundamentally, the concept of ‘laddism’ is embodied in the connotations to the term ‘lad’ itself. Thus, in considering what the word ‘lad’ means to society, I would say that, in everyday society, it often has a positive, rather than a negative, connotation.

Think back and you will realise that you never call an unlikeable character a lad, the furthest you would go is to call them a “lad” – in double quotation marks. An everyday ‘lad’ must be someone who is accepted as one by society, somebody who can be admired.

In believing this, I must reject any qualities that are not socially admirable from the idea of ‘laddism’, for example, misogyny and overt aggressiveness. Many attack ‘lad’ culture for its misogynistic practices on women. But we must rethink this and ask ourselves if our interpretation of ‘lad’ culture is inclusive of misogyny, or are we just thinking about ‘dick’ culture?

I will not deny, however, the other characteristics of what makes a ‘lad’ – being physically fit, being assertive and being casual about life. But that is not to say that these ‘lad’ characteristics are to be encouraged above other traits such as grace and sincerity. What I am saying is that these ‘lad’ traits can be admirable, as much as grace and sincerity can be admirable.

{{ quote The real problem with laddism is the connotation that lad traits belong to the male sex… with this rises problems such as sexual segregation, the reinforcement of gender stereotypes and even the sexual objectification of females }}

But in saying this, some will start to think that I am favouring maleness and enforcing gender stereotypes – I absolutely abhor the word ‘masculine’ – but I am not. Of course, as a personal choice, I may favour typical ‘masculine’ traits themselves such as physicality and assertiveness, but I do not favour the association of these traits to maleness.

That, I believe is the real problem with ‘laddism’; it is the connotation that ‘lad’ traits belong to the male sex. With this connotation of ‘laddism’ with maleness, problems such as sexual segregation, the reinforcement of gender stereotypes and even the sexual objectification of females arise. (If sexual objectification were to be ungendered, it would no longer pose a problem to gender equality, though the objectification of sex itself is another matter of discussion)

I know I may sound a little idealistic here, nonetheless, my personal definition of ‘laddism’ is ungendered – to me, it is a desexualised culture which is applicable to both sexes. The problem with ‘laddism’ lies in the definition of laddism to others and society.