This past Tuesday night, Phi Mu held their annual Mr. Phi Mu event, a loosely defined talent contest that raised money to benefit the Katie Oppo Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The event basically consists of a bunch of representatives from the various fraternities and sports teams performing on stage.
There "talents" can range anywhere from frying chicken on stage to treating the Phi Mu ladies to lap dances in front of the audience. Naturally, the event is always a big hit and raises a significant amount of money for a more-than-worthy cause. Not to mention it brings the Hopkins community together for a good time and a barrel of laughs.
It is hosted in Shriver Hall, the main auditorium on the Homewood campus, and every year students turn out in droves to support the cause and watch their friends showcase their respective talents.
This year was no exception; there was a plethora of interesting and unique talents. However, there were also a noticeably high number of lap dances and half-naked guys on the stage in Shriver. The contest effectively turned into a pageant-like competition in which men were stripped down and strutted around the stage while their classmates laughed and jeered them on.
The winner, Dave Davino of Sigma Phi Epsilon, did different exercises, using one of the sorority’s sisters as a weight. Yik Yak was abuzz with anonymous commentary on the event as numerous photos were immediately uploaded to social media. The crowd watched as contestant after contestant came up, and by the third lap dance, nobody batted an eyelash.
The contest did not offend anyone nor cause controversy of any kind, and it raised money for a good cause. While the contest could be considered a bit crude, it is innocuous in nature overall, and it carried through with ironic-enough intent that it’s funny. However, it forces one to consider the possibility — what if a fraternity did the exact same thing?
What if some fraternity on campus held a contest called “Mrs. X” and had members from the different sororities get up on the Shriver Hall stage half-dressed?
What if these girls were to get up there and give lap dances to the guys in said fraternity while their friends all watched and jeered on? If a fraternity ran a campus-facilitated event in which girls strutted around the stage in Shriver showcasing their talents and at the end, the audience voted to determine a victor, how would the Hopkins community react?
While a contest like this might take place elsewhere, a school teeming with rhetoric on gender equality and women’s rights, such as Hopkins, would most likely not allow it to happen. If feminism is grounded in equality, then, on some level, doesn’t that include men’s rights as well?
Of course, the reality of the situation is different. The objectification of women by men is historically far larger of an issue than that of the reversed scenario. There is no doubt that this issue is far more sensitive for women than it is for men. Because of this historical reality, objectification of men is “funny” and “ironic” while objectification of women is sexist and wrong. This is not a bad thing, though. If we acknowledge the nuances that distinguish what is acceptable for each gender, then we get closer to a more transparent and real discussion about what comprises these perceptions.
Because women have been more prone to this type of treatment throughout history, they are more sensitive to it and aware of it, whereas men are not sensitive toward being objectified because it is not a common problem. If the aforementioned “Mrs. X” contest happened in the middle of Shriver and girls were stripping on stage, there would be a torrent of so much Hopkins Internet activity that the servers would all shut down.
Every feminist activist group on campus, which make up like half of the total student groups, would be up in arms. It is important to understand the complexity behind gender roles in order to know what is regarded as acceptable for each gender.
