Friday, April 16, 2010

Newsflash #3- (the hardest one i've ever had to write)

Feminism fights to create equality for women so women can hold power roles in all facets of life such as business, the house, and especially in terms of their sex lives. “Where the Boys Are” by Molly Simms reveals problems of exploitation and contradictions for all parties involved not just the men who are selling their “services” to women. I feel as though I must preference firstly, the fact that this article is talking about a “cultural phenomenon” in Japan and I am critiquing it based on an American viewpoint and using American feminist theories that we have learned about in class. Secondly, I have to say that I found the article presenting such a multifaceted array of issues, each that I found to be problematic.

At first I found the article, which was published in Bust April/May issue, to be extremely interesting and problematic for the boys whose career choice was being addressed and given new attention to a new circle of people. This again, I realized was coming from an American standpoint, so while rereading I tried to put my immediate judgment to the side, but quickly realized that I could not. The article, whether intentionally or not, reveals that this line of work, not only hurts the men who choose to “sell their bodies” but also the women who chose to buy it.

At first glance this article describes a world of flashing lights where women seem to be in control. Simms is appropriate in saying, “In a fascinating twist on the centuries-old geisha tradition, Japanese women are shelling out big bucks for a night’s worth of attention from beautiful ‘host boys’.” Essentially what these young men’s job entails is to make women feel good. On the surface it is not the equivalent to what we would call prostitution or even escort service here in the US. In Japan there is a whole industry based on this line of work. Perhaps the seemingly acceptance of this work, comes from a long tradition in the form of geisha, yet it has transformed over the years. This industry evolved from geisha into a world of hostess at first and then eventually included hosts. A host does the exact same thing as hostess. “Hostesses cater to deep-pocketed businessmen who attend kyabakura, a Japanglish term that’s a blend of ‘cabaret’ and ‘club’. There are approximately 13,000 of these establishments in Tokyo alone, where men pay through the nose for top-shelf booze and the company of women who pour them drinks, listen to their corny jokes and offer hot hand towels as they leave the restroom. Modern hostesses can, and often must, boost their salaries with dohan, paid dinner dates that occur outside the club…it’s common for them to receive lavish gifts for sleeping with customers during off hours.” This is what the industry grew into and now the gender roles have been switched. Now instead, or more appropriately now there are both hostess and host. Women now are in some ways subordinating men.

The question on whether it is right for women to subordinate men as being right or wrong is a whole other question that I would have gone into, however, I found the article moved away from this and presented another problem-both sexes are being used. Again, I am not sure if the author recognized this problem or not; for she did not come right out and say these men are being treated badly and these women are not actually in control. Simms just lays out the picture of what is occurring leaving the questioning and investigation up to the reader. Yet, her use of language allows for the reader to really devolve into this multifaceted predicament of “hosting”.

Firstly I want to focus on why choosing to be a “host boy” is problematic for men. I already stated that some might find these men are being kept in a position where they lack the ability to express themselves. They are in some ways inferior; their feelings do not matter. Clearly the men who choose to do this line of work need the money (one would assume). Who knows if they have any other outlets and this job in some ways keeps them in an inferior position. Is this what feminism wants? I happen to think it is not the ideals of feminism, I believe feminism stands for equality for all. Women should not acquire power by keeping men down.

Yet, this is not the real issue of the article. Women are not keeping down these men; other men subordinate them. At these clubs there is a clear class distinction, the more time you serve the more you are respected. “Newbies have to pay their dues before ranking in the big bucks, by doing gruntwork around the club-scrubbing toilets, washing dishes, taking out the trash-and ‘catching’ new customers on the street.” There are many episodes where newer host suffer violence from senior host. The article provides first hand accounts from different men in the business. “One time, one got so mad at me that he almost hit me in the head with a bottle of Jack Daniels. It was for some very minor reason…I was too nervous to even speak…” Besides physical and demeaning demands placed by other men, these men are suffering from serious health problems. “The number of hosts who stay in the business more than a year is about 1 in 100, and the reason for the high turnover is most likely the booze.” These men’s’ job is to get their clients trashed and in doing that they themselves end up getting hammered. This is a requirement by the clubs. “Drinking such mass quantities of booze necessitates that they force themselves to vomit, sometimes a few times a night, so they can stay upright until closing.” This is a serious issue; alcohol poison results in death and these men are walking a very thin line. Based on these issues, it is clear that host boys are not necessarily being subordinated by women, but by the establishment with which they work. In the article, it appeared as though men own most of these clubs. Thus, men are subordinating other men.

Secondly, the other problem I found was women are not actually in control. They are given the illusion that they are, but in fact are being taken advantage of themselves. The language of the article had a huge influence on my conclusion of this issue. First of all, it appears as though host boys are preying on women. They are required to stand outside and look for women to bring into the clubs. “When a girl in a thigh-length skirt totters unsteadily around the corner, the hosts walk toward her with a smile.” Also, these institutions, in some way, make women dependent on the host. It is explained as a drug.
“Much like drug dealers who give potential customers the initial hit for free, first-timers can expect to pay only about $35 for a night of drinks and flirty banter. Once she is hooked (italicized not included in the article) on the doting, however, to come back in the door she’ll pony up around $300 for a night of male attention and a couple of rounds of drinks, and that’s without any of the extras like private time or bottles of champagne, which can easily push her bill to four or five digits.…The girl who’s dropping the cash becomes the center of attention, with host circling her, changing her name on microphones and music pounds, and holding a damp towel under her chin while she downs alcohol. Host make a 50 percent commission on whatever their customers pay for in the club, so it’s in their best interest (not italicized in article) to keep the booze flowing and the ladies spending.”
I cannot read this and not think that these women are not being taken advantage of. Yes, they choose to go to these clubs, but they are being exploited. They are given individual attention and then pushed to intoxication levels that make their level judgment and competence questionable.

Thirdly, These clubs and relationship are based on lies. Hosts spend the majority of their time perfecting the ideal man. “The hosts style themselves to resemble their clients’ ultimate male fantasy. After that he is expected to understand and sympathize, to an extent, the women’s plight. “He has to understand how she is not being satisfied in her daily life and satisfy her.” Sociology professor Kyle Cleveland, at Tempel University in Japan stays, “What is being bought is a form of companionship.” Since it is being bought it is not genuine or real. It is a lie. Again, first hand accounts reveal the truth this truth, “I got so tired of lying to the customers… I had to praise them… everything was based on lies.”

Fourthly, another point that I had contention with is “70 to 80 percent of the host’s earnings come from prostitute clients.” The vast majority of women going to these clubs are prostitutes themselves! They are already involved in a business, which keeps them at a disadvantage. These social circles are playing off of each other.

This article revealed so many different issues it was hard to figure out what I was arguing for and against. I spent a lot of time to map out all of the problems and still feel as though I am not doing this article justice. And at the same time, I wonder if I am imposing my own ideas onto a culture that may not see an issue. I have to wonder if that is why Simms does not clearly articulate the problems, but uses strong words to depict that there is a problem.

April Levy, was the first theorist that came to mind when evaluating all the problems of hosting. I thought of her chapter pigs in training, and how she argues that these women are being lied to. Young girls believe that sex equates power. This on one level works directly due to sex being the issue in question, but on a deeper level it insinuates that both these men and women who participate in hosting, whether by selling or buying, believe that they are in control- they are buying into a system that actually gives them no power and instead keeps them inferior.

One more time, I have to wonder if I bit off more than I could chew. I tried to reveal my issues of contempt while realizing that I know nothing about this culture. Then I tried to support my argument with American theorists, who know nothing about Japanese culture. I have to admit that I feel as though I am being Eurocentric in my viewing of hosting in Japan.

News Flash : Home Economics For Everyone










When I began reading Emily McCombs’ article “Home Sweet Home EC: from feminist roots to gender role reinforcement and back again, the history of home economics might surprise you” I was sure I would vehemently disagree with her thesis. After the first paragraph it appears as if she’s advocating for women to stay in the home. But that is not the whole story. In McCombs’ article she relays the history of home economics—which was actually founded by some of the first women to receive college educations—as it begins and then how public school curriculums and the popular media diluted it until it became the image we have today. Many of McCombs’ points have merit; she conveys how important the work of the home is, and how uneducated people are on the subject. I agree with her opinion that more praise should be given to this work and I stand by the idea that college-aged kids should learn about these life-skills. But where my issue with this article lies in the fact that she is only advocating for women to be educated in the field of home economics. If this is important work, which it is, then men should certainly be educated in it too.

In 1899 a group of women, who were college educated, mainly in the sciences, gathered in Lake Placid, NY. From this meeting the term “home economics” was born. Eventually this small group expanded and by 1909 they formed the American Home Economics Associated (AHEA). The issue these women faced was they had all this knowledge, but weren’t getting jobs because of the male dominated work force. According to Virginia Vincenti, Family and Consumer Sciences professor at the University of Wyoming and co-editor of Rethinking Home Economics, “Many of them were trained in science with limited opportunity to use it because of prejudice against women. So they decided to create their own field”(p.1, McCombs). They began applying all their knowledge into daily tasks of the household. They “envisioned an academic program on the college level that would value nutrition and food science over cooking, textiles and clothing construction over sewing and bacteriology and germ theory over household cleaning”(p.2, McCombs).  They wanted to establish this field as something more than it was seen as by the majority of people. And at the same time wanted to improve the practices in a household; by making food healthier, advanced cleaning practices, and cutting down on waste in terms of water, electricity and food.


 

Many colleges and universities were open to this idea, however many male figureheads kept trying to package the course as something far simpler than what it was. “Martha Van Kensselaer, who developed Cornell’s home economics department, attempted to take a bacteriology course In order to explain the importance of kitchen cleanliness to students, the male professor told her, ‘Oh, they do not need to know about bacteria. Teach them to keep the dish cloth clean because it is nicer that way’”(p.3, McCombs).


 

Similar misinterpretations took place on a younger education level as well. The programs in public middle and high schools have taken an image of something stereotypical of this field that the women of AHEA had not intended. McCombs blames these skewed curricula for diluting the image of home economics in our society.

 

As well, this group received intense backlash from many radical feminist, who viewed housework and the study of it as the antithesis to women’s liberation. Famed feminist Betty Friedan made comments on this effort at a women’s liberation convention that “were so incendiary, no records of them remains”(p.3, McCombs).

 

The complaints of these radical feminists have substantial merit. This movement has implications that could potentially be impeding on women trying to enter the work force. Barbara Ehrenreich discusses in her essay “Maid To Order” how the fact that women are viewed as the only gender that can perform housework is a continuing issue. “And when the person who is cleaned up after is consistently male, while the person who cleans up is consistently female, you have a formula for reproducing male domination from one gender to the next”(p.61, Ehrenreich). I whole-heartedly agree with McCombs’ points that the work done in a household is profoundly important, doesn’t get the recognition it deserve and should be part of the curriculum in colleges and universities. But the language in her article seems to perpetuate the notion that these responsibilities are only under the jurisdiction of women. However, if these courses did become mainstream at universities, then they have the potential to become required courses and in turn exposed to male students who—now better equipped with the tools necessary—can take part in the household tasks.

 

The AHEA listened to what the radical feminists had to say. Since these conventions they’ve made strides to make this movement not seem as suppressive towards women, “that rethinking eventually led to the curriculum-wide name change to Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS) in 1992”(p.4, McCombs). According to the leaders of this program, the only hope for the future of this field is today’s college students. They hope this new title while help the course gain more approval and attract more students.

 

As a college student, I see the merit in a course such as FCS. Perhaps most importantly I can see how a course of this nature would positively impact the lives of many of my male peers who don’t see this type of knowledge as their responsibility.

 

Thursday, April 15, 2010

News Flash: Nebraskan Law Restricts Abortion Based on Fetal Pain




There have been controversial and endless debates over a women’s right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. Following the 1973 United States Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade, women, throughout the United Sates, gained the right to obtain an abortion. Over time, states have passed various laws that have restricted women’s right to choose. Monica Davey, in her article “Nebraska Law Sets Limits on Abortion,” discusses the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” an anti-abortion law that was recently passed in Nebraska. This is the first time that a law, regarding abortion, has been based on the fetuses’ ability to perceive pain. This law, which restricts women from having an abortion twenty weeks after gestation, separates Nebraska from all other state. It is time for the federal government to develop a comprehensive act that standardizes abortion in all fifty states. The laws must be clear and preempt states from placing excessive restrictions on abortions. The goal behind this federal amendment should be to remove the hurdles, which many pregnant women who seek abortion continue to confront.

Governor Dave Heineman, of Nebraska, signed a law on Tuesday, April 13th, that banned abortions after twenty weeks of conception. Nebraska’s state unicameral legislature passed this law with a vote of 44 to 5. Nebraska legislature purported that a fetus can feel pain after twenty weeks of gestation. This is the first law in the United States that restricts late-term abortions on the basis of fetal pain. The law further states that any physician who performs an abortion after twenty-weeks of conception has committed a felony. Nebraska’s quick action to enact this law is reflective of a fear that it may become the next “late-term abortion capital of the Midwest” (Davey A16). Dr. George R. Tiller, a prominent late-term abortion provider, was killed in Wichita, Kansas, on May 31, 2009. It is ironic to note that Scott Roeder, a pro-life advocate, murdered Dr. Tiller. How can a pro-life advocate justify murdering an individual? Following Dr. Tiller’s death, a friend of his, Dr. LeRoy H. Carhart, decided that he would perform late-term abortions at his clinic in Bellevue, Nebraska. Dr. Carhart’s decision was the impetus that caused Nebraskan lawmakers to hastily past this recent abortion restriction.



The previous law that was in place in Nebraska, and currently remains in many other states, banned abortions after the fetus reached viability. While this has been determined on an individual basis, twenty-two weeks has been the baseline criteria. Nebraska is unique in that it forbids abortion after twenty weeks because of a presumption that a fetus can then feel pain. The exception to Nebraska’s newly passed law is the case of a medical emergency. If there is a concern that a pregnancy will result in the death or harm a vital bodily function, an abortion can be performed. This law makes Nebraska’s abortion policy different and more restrictive than other states. Thirty-eight states have restrictions on late term abortions but none as early as twenty weeks.

Numerous abortion proponents are outraged by this new legislation. Nancy Northup, president of Center for Reproductive Rights, states that they are looking into all possibly routes to appeal the recent law passed in Nebraska. Ms. Northup explains that, over time, state legislation has placed varied restrictions on abortion that weakened the decision of Roe v. Wade. Ms. Northup further clarifies that the law that was recently passed in Nebraska was of a whole different magnitude. “If some of these other anti-abortion bills have been chipping away at Roe v. Wade, this takes an ax to it” (Davey A16). “But abortion opponents say a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding a federal ban on certain late-term abortions opens the door for such legislation because it suggests states have an interest in protecting fetuses. They also say the bill makes sense given what they say is new scientific evidence that fetuses feel pain” (Jenkins 1). The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist stated, during the trial, that it knows “no legitimate scientific information that supports the statement that a fetus experiences pain” (Harris, Khan, Vogue 1). The controversy over when/if a fetus feels pain remains unclear. Should medical and/or legal experts make this decision? Is this a question that anyone can answer with absolute certainty? It has been hypothesized that Nebraska hopes the current, more conservative Supreme Court will review their recent legislation. Pro-lifers believe that these judges would further restrict Roe v. Wade based on the presumption that fetuses can perceive pain after twenty weeks gestation. Whether or not a fetus is able to perceive pain at this point has not been scientifically established. The Supreme Court needs to both uphold Roe v. Wade and establish federal guidelines that ensure similar freedoms within all states.

Igna Muscio offers her thoughts regarding abortion within her article, “Abortion, Vacuum Cleaners, and the Power Within.” After Ms. Muscio underwent three abortions, she advocates against clinical abortions. She believes that women should look for alternative, organic abortions. Ms. Muscio would most probably oppose the recent Nebraskan law. Ms. Muscio supports a woman’s right to choose for or against abortion. She would though argue that individuals should search for alternative means of late-term abortions that move away from western medicine. “The squabble between pro-lifers and pro-choicers severs only to keep our eyes off the target: patriarchal society” (Listen up 117). Legislation needs to be passed that sets the same standards for all states and allows individuals to make their own, educated choices.

Allison Crew’s article, “And So I chose,” expands on her decision to be pro-woman and pro-choice. Ms. Crews believes that a woman should have the right to choose to have or not to have an abortion and be supported independent of her choice. Ms. Crew would oppose Nebraska’s new, more restrictive policy on abortion. Ms. Crew discusses that most second wave feminists do not remember the struggle of previous generations to obtain reproductive choice. “I doubt many of us, conceived after Roe v. Wade became law, remember a time when birth control pills had yet to be invented and diaphragms and condoms were not readily available to unmarried women. A time when a woman faced with an unplanned pregnancy could either give birth, or risk mutilation of her body and possibly death” (Listen Up 143). Individuals need to remember why certain rights were established and ensure that they are upheld.

The Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade left loopholes open that allowed states to establish restrictions regarding abortion. The Supreme Court needs to establish federal guidelines that resolve ambiguity and ensure women’s right to choose. No legislation is suggesting that a woman have or not have an abortion. A woman may choose to have an abortion because of an unplanned pregnancy, rape, positive amniocentesis, and/or exposure to harmful toxins. Similarly, no legislation should mandate that a physician perform or not perform an abortion. Some physicians have moral and/or religious beliefs that result in their decision not to perform abortions. The time for federal legislation to ensure a women’s right to choose and uphold Roe v. Wade is now.


Feminism hurting women

Gwendolyn Mink's "The Lady and the Trap" acknowledges the damages the US welfare system places on women who find themselves in need of that service. She does an excellent job of recognizing where the short falls come from.

Welfare in the United States has a very negative connotation. Women who end up needing to be on it are considered lazy and abusive of the system. "In the popular imagination, welfare participants are reckless breeders who bear children to avoid work. Such vintage stereotypes have bipartisan roots... Racially charged images of lazy, promiscuous, and matriarchal women have dominated welfare discourse for quite some time, inflaming demands that mothers who need welfare-although perhaps not their children-must pay for their improvident behavior through work, marriage, or destitution." As mentioned in the quote this stereotype is being used by both political parties, yet Mink recognizes that Feminism has allowed it to continue and has given these policy makers an excuse.

Feminism is predominately a one class one race voice, especially when it comes to policy on welfare. This feminism represents white- middle and upper class women. These woman's issues are quite different than the women who find themselves needing assistance. Feminism believes itself to be helping "women" but it is only helping a certain group of women and while keeping others down. Feminism, has placed a huge emphasis on work outside the home, to say women should be allowed to work outside of the home and this will create equality for women. Yet, this only creates equality for a group of women, if it creates equality at all. Most poor women have always worked outside the home, yet their work is not recognized or praised. Thus only certain types of work is seen as important. "Part of the problem, I think, is that white and middle-class feminists-who are the mainstream of the women's movement view
mothers who need welfare as mothers who need feminism. They see welfare mothers as victims-of patriarchy, maybe of racism, possibly of false consciousness. They don't see welfare mothers as feminist agents of their own lives-as women who are entitled to and capable of making independent and honorable choices about what kind of work they will do and how many children they will have and whether they will marry. As a result, when many white, middle-class feminists weighed into the welfare debate, it was to prescribe reforms to assimilate welfare mothers to white feminists' own goals-principally,independence through paid employment."

There needs to be a shift in how feminism thinks of equality. First, feminism needs to recognize not all women have the same issues and thus one group must not speak for another. Each group need to have her own voice. Second, there needs to be a shift on what type of work is considered respectable and worthy. All women are at a disadvantage if we continue to think that only work outside the home will give us equality. The truth of the matter is even if women work outside the home they are still doing the majority of the work inside the home. Now they have two jobs, one that may or may not be recognized outside the house and one that is for sure not recognized inside the house. We need not only focus on having a dual-earner policy but a dual-earner and dual-carer model. And even that language is discriminatory. Many women are single and will not have a second income or second hand to help in the house, yet with this language at least there could be recognition that both types of work-out of the house and especially in the house- are respectable and deserve attention and payment.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Higher Ed does not equate leaving poverty

The two readings from Listen Up yelled out that disadvantages still emanate for people seeking to improve their economic situations by attaining higher education. Both authors give first hand accounts of the struggles they faced while in college, and then after. These articles infuriated me because here are women working hard trying to change their situation but unable to escape the system to which they were either born into or for some unfortunate event found themselves in.

Aisha Hakim-Dyce's "Reality Check" expresses her difficult time trying to make money while at school to pay for all her expenses. Hakim-Dyce was seeking higher education but could not afford to live off of the work-study program. She seriously considered go-go dancing as a way to make fast money to pay off her debts and to be able to live.

At first I was appalled that she would only believe this was her only option. She states, "None of my attempts at self-development translated into employment opportunities. I was constantly depressed and often thought of dropping out of school in order to hold down a full-time job to cover my living expenses." This is extremely sad. Education is suppose to offer a way out of poverty a way to better your life, yet here she is unable to even pay for food. The reason I was appalled by her decision to seriously consider go-go dancing is because it is "depleting experience... demoralizing and dehumanizing work." I did not understand why she did not try to be a waitress. The hours are flexible and depending on the establishment you can make some serious money through tips. You would not be selling you body (to an extent) to make a quick buck. However, by the end of the piece I stopped judging her and realized she felt this way for only reasons she knows. This saddened me. The challenges the poor must face are completely unfair.

Maria Cristina Rangel's "Knowledge Is Power" is just as depressing. Her situation is a little different. She was untraditional student going to Smith to try and get out of her unfortunate situation. "I wanted a better life for myself and wanted to ensure that my daughters would know more than the rural, misogynistic, racist, homophobic area of Washington state I grew up in, where the only options for an uneducated Chicana single mother seemed to be migrant farm labor, factory work and marriage." She had two kids already and was overwhelmed by the expectations put upon her. As an untraditional student she did not get the same grants or work-study opportunities as a traditional student. This in itself does not seem fair. Also, "under welfare reform, recipients of TAFDC, which she was on, are able to receive only two years of benefits within a five-year period. Recipients are required to enroll in training or job-preparation activity in exchange for their benefits, and the pursuit of higher education does not qualify as valid training." This is just one of the problems she face. She realized that reform was needed and set her sights on this goal.

This last essay really pushed me over the edge. I wanted to shout, WE MUST HELP THOSE WHO ARE TRYING!!!!!! We cannot continue to say that these women on welfare are lazy and only give them some help while at the same time limiting their chances of succeeding. Welfare, is not something someone wishes to be on and I feel as though our system says they are "helping" they are actually hurting people who find themselves in need of real help. We must acknowledge the realities and set up programs that allow people to make a better life for themselves and to finally be able to get off welfare. We must stop thinking and assuming "that you (people on welfare) are trying to scrw the DTA over..."

Monday, April 5, 2010

Do Weddings Offer Equality?

Paula Ettelbrick examines and discusses reasons against same-sex marriage within her article, “Since When I marriage a Path to Liberation.” Ms. Ettelbrick sees marriage as an ineffective institution. The author explains that some individuals marry to gain approval from society. She explains that marriage maintains the patriarchal system, which supports continued male dominance over women. The author argues against same-sex marriage until innovative changes have been made within the institution of marriage. To date, marriage too often does not offer equality to both partners. While Ms. Ettelbrick explains that gay and lesbians should have the right to marry, she argues that marriage is not the panacea that these groups believe. Marriage will not solve many of the problems and biases that continue to exist. “Rather, a simple certificate of the state, regardless of whether the spouses love, respect, or even see each other on a regular basis, dominates and is supported. None of this dynamic will change if gay men and lesbians are given the option of marriage” (308 Ettelbrick). Marriage has often lost the meaning that it once may have possessed. The concept of marriage needs to be reexamined prior to allotting this legal option to all individuals. On the other hand, gay and lesbian couples who have been living together for years should be provided the benefits of shared health insurance and decreased taxes that married couples enjoy on a daily basis. One needs to remember that offering the legal right to marry is an option and never mandatory. It should be an option for all committed couples who are interested. Cohabitating couples, who are in a committed relationship but chose not to marry, should have the right to share benefits, such as health insurance and tax deduction.

Nancy Naples’ article, “Queer Parenting in the New Millennium,” nicely accompanies Ms. Ettelbrick’s discussion on same sex marriage. Ms. Naples introduces the struggles of same-sex parenting and the legal conflicts that arise. The complexity of gay and lesbian legal rights was examined. This has raised awareness to the cost and benefits of same-sex marriage within the gay and lesbian community. There needs to be general guidelines for all individuals: heterosexuals, bisexuals, gays, and lesbians, who choose to adopt orphans. Recognizing the number of parentless children in the world, it is important to identify capable adults who want to adopt. Today, witch medical advances in fertility treatment individuals have increased options for birthing children. The same guidelines should apply to heterosexual and same-sex couples. With respect to Eteelbrick, while same same-sex marriage is not the solution it should be an option for gay and lesbian couples who choose to partake. More importantly, legislation should be developed that allows all cohabitating, committed couples to share work benefits for themselves and their children. While there is a risk that certain individuals will take advantage of the system, the option needs to be allotted. Therefore, criminal action should be taken when false claims for benefits are made. Inequality will continue to exist until all individuals are offered the same rights. Civil rights should never be restricted from individuals due to sexual preference.

Marriage for all does not mean equality

Paula Ettelbrick's essay, "Since When is Marriage a Path to Liberation?" shocking. Before reading this essay I never questioned that some gay or lesbians may not want marriage. I did not that there were some gay and lesbians that felt that marriage instead of creating equality just points out the obvious differences and keeps some who chose marriage more marginalized than before, if not keeping those who chose not to wed extremely marginalized. Ettelbrick example of the women who chooses to have sexual relations outside of marriage facing stigma really took home her point. That those men and women that may not choose to get married but still pursue their sexual relations, will continue to face the old stigmas they faced in the past as well as new ones.

She raises great points that some would still not receive the benefits of marriage and it keeps those people-minorities and working class- at a clear disadvantage. Yet, I wonder with the new health care bill if she would change her mind. No longer does a women or a man have to depend on his or her spouse for health insurance. Would she look at marriage differently? I have a feeling she would not. She does not seem to be happy about the fact that through marriage are men and women accepted for themselves. Yet, she acknowledges that we all feel a need to be accepted. So her argument raises many important points and gives a voice that I have not heard before. However, in light of recent legislature I wonder if her argument would change.

On this note I am also curious to what Kenji Oshino would say. I think he would agree that she should not have to confirm, but isn't he married? Doesn't the being able to have the choice of marriage mean in some part finally being seen as equal? The more I think about all the other sides of the coin and the arguments that I have heard in pro-gay marriage, Ettelbricks argument is in some ways lacking. Her fears are getting the better of her. I am not saying she does not have a right to feel this way, but wouldn't part of being accepted as being equal mean having the same rights as heterosexual men and women? Perhaps she is right that we still need to change our legislation so that this is not the only option. There are many heterosexual men and women who are not married, have kids, who for some reason or another chose not to marry. Are they not facing the same legal standing as homosexual men and woman?

inequality

In Paula Ettelbrick's essay on marriage, she concludes that marriage is not a path to liberation for anyone; whether your gay or straight. But in fact that marriage as an institution creates a division between the "have's" and the "have nots" as our legal system and system of benefits favors those who have chosen to marry over those who have not. I agree with many of the points Ettelbrick makes. I have been taught about the benefits of marriage throughout my life, but never was it clear to me how these benefits marginalized those who don't "fit the bill." Her point about how the legalization of gay marriage will do nothing but reassert these imbalances that are in place really helped me understand the unfair qualities of this institution. As well, her example of a lesbian woman who is not allowed to be with her wounded partner in a hospital room because she is not "family" is clearly bureaucratic  cruelty. As well, when she compares this situation to that of affirmative action, her point became even clearer.
"will result, at best, in limited or narrowed 'justice' for those closest to power at the expense of those who have been historically marginalized." One area of her essay that I found a bit confusing was her opinion on our legal system. She states that the laws in the US have a concept of equality that does not support differences, it supports sameness. But she also notes the need for all relationships to be recognized legally. So does she believe our society can change its ways through an alteration of the laws? Or that we as people have to change and the laws will follow suit?

What I found most interesting in Nancy Naples essay was the bit about a co-mother's relationship to her daughter, given birth to by her lesbian partner. The partner who gave birth to the child feels suddenly more accepted in conventional society, as her role of "mother" suddenly trumps her sexual orientation. However the co-mother, who did not give birth, finds herself at a loss for explaining her relationship to her daughter, which is entirely equivalent to that of a father, but somehow our language doesn't permit this relationship justice. 

The very notion of "labels" is very prevalent in our society, as we have noted throughout this course. Be it an infant who is ambiguously gendered, or a two people who have an ambiguous relationship, it appears our society is obsessed with making things clearer for strangers. Why does everyone have to understand everyone else's business? is it central to a functioning society? How can a society function without labels?


Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Totem Pole of Discrimination

Steven Lee Myers discusses sexual abuse amongst fellow comrades in the United States Army within his article, “A Peril in War Zones: Sexual Abuse by Fellow G.I.’s.” Although United States citizens often acknowledge the savage and horrific rape that occurs in areas overseas, such as the Congo, they too often overlook the similar behavior that occurs in this country. Americans abuse Americans both on foreign and domestic soil. It is unclear how soldiers, whose lives are at risk, continue to abuse each other. The most disturbing part of the article was the stated fear of privates to report sexual abuse by higher-ranking officers. It should be noted that the number of reported sexual assaults in the army has increased. Several questions arise. Is the army now making it more comfortable for victims or witnesses to come forward? On the contrary, is sexual abuse within the army simply rising and the percentage of reported abuse remaining stable? Unfortunately, same gender sexual abuse often remains hidden because soldiers fear that their sexuality will come into question. Until all incidents are reported and all crimes tried, it remains unacceptable. Sexual abuse in the army, as well as society large, is a crime and all reports need to be seriously evaluated.

Kimberle Williams Crenshaw introduces the Intersectionality Theory within her work, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color.” Ms. Crenshaw focuses on multilevel discrimination of minority women based on race, gender, and ethnicity. When these women are persecuted, they have nowhere to turn. Ms. Crenshaw offers numerous examples as well as statistics to substantiate her theory. The voice of these subgroups is too often silenced. Until feminist groups unify and represent all women, persecution of minority subgroups will often go unheard. There is a significant problem I had with Ms. Crenshaw’s article. The author, an African American woman who graduated from Columbia Law School, discusses the multitude of problems that exist for women due to race, color, or economics. Unfortunately, she presents her theory in a complex manner that is often difficult to follow and understand. As a Colgate junior, I often had to reread sentences in order to fully comprehend her ideas. I question if women, from the minority groups she refers, are aware of her theory or could comprehend her complex article. Ideas should be expressed so individuals can understand and utilize the premises it presents.

dominance

In Steinam's article on Supremacy Crimes she raises the question of how we, as a society, label issues. To her dismay, the COlumbine shootings were labeled in the media as an issue with america's "youth" even though, as she states, the issue is not with such a general group of people. I believe she eloquently sums up the core of the issue when she writes,  "It's a drug pushed by a male-dominant culture that presents dominance as a natural right; a racist hierarchy that falsely elevates whiteness; a materialist society that equates superiority with possessions, and a homophobic one that empowers only one form of sexuality. "(Steinam, pg2). I found her juxtaposition of these realities in our culture with their negative repercussions to be powerful. As well, later in the essay, she makes a distinction through her quotation of Dr. James Gilligan, of how male violence is not only prominent, its obligatory.  "As Dr. James Gilligan concluded in Violence: Reflections on a National Epidemic, "If humanity is to evolve beyond the propensity toward violence...then it can only do so by recognizing the extent to which the patriarchal code of honor and shame generates and obligates male violence." (pg.3) I think we can draw this notion back to Johnson's belief that we should not be blaming the individual, but the society for the wrongdoings occurring throughout our country. 

In Myer's articles on the presence of sexual abuse in the military, he discusses the unique nature of this environment and how it is, at times, more difficult to report an issue of sexual abuse than in other environments. The question that comes to mind after reading these two articles is a biological one. To lay the devils advocate, it could be said that the reason why the "attackers" are most always males, is because they are more sexual beings; they desire sex more frequently, they think about it more often, and thus resort to foreful measure to get what they "need". But if there is one thing that has been driven home for me by this course, is that I need to question societal "assumptions" and beliefs. How much truth is there to this statement? Are men really more sexual than women? Or is this just another societal construct so deeply imbedded in our lives that we can't tell the difference from what's natural and what's not? If it isn't true, and could be proven so, I think there would be some changes in this dynamic. If it wasn't "natural" perhaps more men wouldn't feel "obligated" to partake in these acts. The notion of "everybody's doing it" is powerful. I believe this article can be connected to Muscio's point about how it is important for all of us to look internally for answers, to stop following the lead and do what we feel is right. 


Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Pigs in Training, really?

Ariel Levy's chapter "Pigs in Training" raises the point that teen girls are participating in raunch culture, by dressing and acting slutty. The chapter then moves away from this idea, for a moment and discuses the issue of sex, sex education, and the lack there of. If someone where to flip through my copy, they would notice it was bleeding blue. Marked with comments, not all intellectual. However, I hope to go through some of the arguments she makes that I disagreed with as well as some of the ones that I did agree with. (Fair warning... each of my comments may not tie smoothly to the next).

Levy seems appalled that middle school girls are participating in sexual acts. Especially because she sees it not for their enjoyment but to create a "shock value" where they will become some of the most talked about girls on campus. Now, it was too long ago when I was in middle school, and I have to wonder if things have really changed that much. During my time girls who were sexually active whether that meant having sex or just giving oral- where indeed talked about, but not in a good way. These girls were not being praised for their seemed "maturity" they were looked upon as stupid and slutty, and boys gave them attention but not a good kind, and that was very obvious. There were a handful of girls that started off in their sex life at a young age. Some had serious boyfriends, and those girls were not looked upon as slutty or lose, while others did not and just seemed to hope from one guy to the next- those were the ones that got the bad rep.

Levy, again, makes the connection to this type of behavior based on what celebrities are doing and what the media portrays. She asked a girl who she admires and the girl responded Paris Hilton and Pamela Anderson. Really Levy? THis is where my biggest problem with Levy lies. She takes peoples testimonies and tries to apply them as though they are universal. So whala this must e the culprit of our societies problems. Some girls may look up to these ridiculous women, yet I believe most are not. Pamela Anderson and Paris Hilton are jokes. Their career is based off of superficial things. I'm not saying girls cannot admire them for the life style they lead, they have lots of money, seem to be happy, have the coolest cloths, but I think to look up to them means that you see something in their character of a person that you admire and wish to have. Do girls really want to have huge plastic fake looking boobs, or their sex home video leaked out to the media? I think for the majority that would be a no.

This also brings me to my next annoyance with Levy. She brings up the "swiffer" girl and tries to connect her video that she made for one person as an act of this girl trying to experiment with celebrity. All I have to say is this poor girl, she did something for a guy she liked, and the fool (for the nicest word choice I could possibly give him) disregarded the girls feelings and privacy and sent to to his guy friends who showed it to their friends. This girl did not ask to have her video put on the internet for all to see. Again, she takes examples and twist them to fit her argument.

The next thing I thought was so interesting was her comparison of today's girls to the girls she grew up with. If you look closely not that much has changed. Levy admits that "it was the same in the sense that you always wished you could be the prettiest and the most popular, the one who guys wanted to be with and girls wanted to be...when I went to high school, you wanted to look good and you wanted to look cool" This statement undercuts her whole argument. She actually acknowledges the idea that girls have always wanted to impress boys. However she tries to keep her claim by asserting, "you would have been embarrassed to look slutty." Levy nothing has changed. In your day you wore whatever it was that was seen as cool at the time, these girls are doing the exact same thing. What is seen as cool has changed, nothing else, and even that really hasn't changed all that much. We can all look back and watch movies made in the 70's or 80's and girls are still dressing promiscuous. Therefore is raunch culture to blame and is it even a real thing?

The one thing I need to give Levy credit for is her recognition that many times these young girls are not informed about the many different decisions they can make when it comes to sex. Sexual education for the most part if taught at all is just focused on abstinence. She raises the point that the drive to want sex is something biological, and by not providing education we are harming teens. Peggy Cowan, who I believe to be a physician says she is appalled by the way students act. They are only hurting themselves "One out of Four teens has and STD!" This number startles her and scares her. She worries about her teenage children. She believes she is doing them a grand favor by just telling them to say no. Yet, she herself is actually keeping her children at a disadvantage and allowing them to become part of the statistic. "Every single peer-reviewed clinical study on these issues has concluded that the more people are educated, the less they spread and contract STDs." Get over yourselves people!!!! Teens are going to have sex and experiment with their bodies and others to find out what they like and what they don't like. This is natural, this is life.

There are many more issues I have with Levy's chapter, yet I think these touch upon the main problems of her argument. Again, I find Levy to not be convincing, to undercut her own argument by admitting certain things, and by only addressing the problem at a surface level.

Monday, March 29, 2010

bad romance

In Ariel Levy's chapter, "Pigs in Training" she discusses the overly-sexualized, but unsatisfied teenagers in america today. She interviews a male and a female about their experiences in high school with sexuality. Levy appears to be dumbfounded by this culture, she tries to find its origin, attempts to come up with solutions, but in the end, it seems as if she is solely rendered disgusted. I'm having a similar reaction. 

Here we have David, a popular, good-looking boy saying he doesn't understand why his female classmates dress so provocatively. Yet he still feeds into this culture, and makes no mention of an attempt to counteract it, by either telling his girl-friends his true feelings, or sharing them with his male friends. Then we have Anne, a popular, good-looking girl who openly admits to playing into this culture; dressing provocatively etc, in an effort to be accepted and gain attention. She is not necessarily promiscuous, she just gives off the vibe that she is.  But I am a different kind of dumbfounded than Levy appears to be, I'm not at a loss for understanding this culture, in fact I understand it all too well. I'm at a loss for why in gods name I participated in it. 

For most of my life I've just put it off as part of growing up. In middle school the girls are at the boys beck-and-call, not necessarily sexually, but with an undertone of sexuality. We wanted the boys to think we were hot, cool, and exciting. Why? I couldn't tell you. They were short and skinny and their voices were cracking. But still they commanded the hallways of my school. One boy could make any girl's life a nightmare at the drop of a hat, he just had to spread a rumor to a few of his friends and BOOM she was a leper. Too many of my friends were subject to this type of torment. The kids in my class were sexually active throughout our middle school years. But the discourse was never about sexual pleasure, in was merely boastful. For the life of me I cant understand why it was so feared to be considered "prude" (it was almost worse than being labeled as "slutty".) I guess it has something to do with the culture of youth. When we're younger everyone wants to be the same, we'd walk on fire to fit in, and then when we grow up, all we want to do is be different. Which is why the culture that Levy says our youth is participating in is so scary. If the "norm" is to sexualize yourself, whether you want, or are ready for, sex or not, then thats what everyone is going to do. Often times in our class discussions it seems as if the problems we analyze have no solution in sight. I feel as if, in the case of this issue, Levy is over-thinking it.

  We frequently suggest that teachers and administrators should change their methods, we say that they are to blame. Then, we put the blame on the parents, then we jump to the untouchable devil, the media. I think we're overlooking a potentially viable source of change. The influential kids. The kids who "run the show" at their schools, they influence their peers in ways that no ones willing to admit, but that is clear to all. At times, these students are even more powerful than the teachers. They set the tone, they decide what is cool. Sure, they may be getting these negative messages from the media, but trying to control the  media is a burden that few are willing to take on. This suggestion is a bit outside the box, its unconventional, not traditional and provocative,  but you gotta take risks to have change. If teachers spent some time with these influential students individually, reached out to them, gave them some positive attention, perhaps they could deliver a better message to them about sexuality, that they could pass on to their classmates. Though this appears to be promoting some sort of hierarchy, I think it could be worth a shot.

On another note, I really enjoyed Walker's article "Why I Fight Back". I've been raised to believe that violence is never the answer, that fighting "fire with fire" deems no positive solutions. Though Walker's article is promoting the opposite sentiment, it made me look at the issue from another angle. After reading Brownmiller's essay on rape, in which she states that it is just another tool of patriarchal society utilized to frighten and oppress women, I realized that it isn't necessarily the act of fighting back that is important, but the ability to do so. Walker has never had to use her karate skills, but her confidence has grown immensely since obtaining them. If patriarchal society is a mindset, a notion that men are more dominant, then an opposition to this society can also be as simple as a mindset, knowing that you are capable is more important than actually hurting an attacker.

Finally, Morgan's article "Don't Call Me a Survivor". I agree with Alex when he says that this is one of the more disturbing articles that we've read. I literally can't fathom this woman's pain. The physical pain of the act, but more profoundly the years and years that she will need to cope with the resulting emotional pain. The article was almost too devastating to finish. I don't really know how to summarize my thoughts on her experiences, I feel I won't do them justice. I am, however, really interested to see how my male classmates will react to this article. I look forward to hearing their responses tomorrow.

Rape: An Act of Violence

Ariel Levy’s chapter discusses the provocative clothing choices and promiscuous behavior that many teenager girls participate in today. These girls’ choices may be motivated by a wish to be desired by the “boys.” This often causes teenage girls to try and one up another. Levy offers examples of numerous girls in middle school who perform oral sex on buses or make videos of themselves masturbating in hopes of gaining attention as well as popularity. The girls ranged from various socio economic classes, which show that this problem is prevalent amongst varied groups in society. Sex too often becomes an activity to gain acceptance instead of something that is meant for pleasure and intimacy. The author concludes her chapter with criticism of Bush’s administration increased funding for school education promoting abstinence from premarital sex. Wouldn’t it be more effective to have sex education which focused on safe sex and voluntary sex? Levy often blames teenage promiscuity on society but offers little criticism of the parents who do not adequately educate as well as monitor their teenagers. It would be more effective to educate children both at home and in the classroom with regards to contraception and safe sex. All teenagers need to remember that sex should be voluntarily activity and not peer pressured. Levy’s chapter bridges into a discussion regarding rape, introduced by Susan Brownmiller. Too often girls are seen as asking to be raped because of the attire they choose to wear or the promiscuous manner in which they act. Rape is an act violence; there is no justification.

Susan Brownmiller discusses the history as well as the myths of rape within her book, Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape. The author’s clarifies that rape is not primarily a sexual crime but rather an act of violence. Rape is an act of male dominance over women which leave women in a constant state of terror. Her book confronts the myths of rape. “All woman want to be raped,” “She was asking for it,” and “if you’re going to be raped, you might as well relax and enjoy it” (Brownmiller 272). It is interesting to note that her book was published in 1975 yet is still applicable today. When approximately one out of four women will be raped during their life, it shows that little, if any, progress has been made since the 1970s.

Whitney Walker’s article, “Why I Flight Back,” accompanies Susan
Brownmiller’s discussion on the fear that is often instilled within women. Ms. Walker explains her experience of taking self-defense classes in order to gain confidence and diminish the dominance that men have gained over women. Ms. Walker promotes these classes for all women. The author suggests that if women learn to defend themselves, the incidents of rape will diminish. These classes will provide women with a sense of confidence and make them feel less vulnerable. In Mrs. Walker’s case, she gained the ability to defend herself successfully against perpetrators. She explains that if someone is robbing an individual, she should hand over her wallet but if someone touches an individual sexually, she needs to respond defensively. When women fight back, the burden of fear that numerous women carry with them will decrease.

Emile Morgan offers a detailed description of the four rapes she has experienced in her article, “Don’t Call Me a Survivor.” This article was one of the more difficult things that I have read. This woman lives everyday recollecting the horrors she underwent. Can an individual who has been gang raped by a multitude of perpetrators for six hours and twenty-six minutes ever forget this incident? Yet, criminals who participate in such acts most probably live their lives with little or no remorse. The worst part was that her family, friends, and law enforcement, made little effort to support this teenager. Society needs to change. Rape is widely prevalent and too often overlooked. The abuse of alcohol and drugs commonly play a role in forced sexual behaviors. Women should not blame themselves for causing such acts of violence to occur. As Susan Brownmiller explains, rape is an act of violence and society needs to treat it as a crime.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Birthing scares the ssssshiit out of me!!!

Birth scares the crap out of me for all the reasons listed in Gawande's article. Yes, I realize that new andvancements in technology have decreased the death rate. Still I had the hardest time reading this article. I've been sitting here for the past half hour trying to get all the way through this article, and I still only find myself on page eight. I am so squirmy its ridiculous. Forceps and other techniques are just making this reading for me impossible.

I can hear my mother in my head right now telling me to stop acting so silly. That its a natural and beautiful thing. Yet still I cannot stop my initial reaction. I am sorry to say that I just have to stop reading this tonight. I can't handle all this... it is freaking me out!

Baby on Board


Atul Gawande discusses the evolution of childbirth within his article, “How Childbirth went Industrial.” Throughout Mr. Gawande’s description of the technological advancements of birth, he includes a detailed description of Elizabeth Rourke’s pregnancy and the birth of her infant. This provides the reader with a complex pregnancy that ended successfully. Other tools that were also used were electronic fetal monitoring (EFM), IV fluids, an epidural, and Pitocin to speed up labor. He explains that while these tools may be overused, they have made pregnancy and delivery safer for the mother as well as the child. Unlike other medical fields, new ideas and technology were often tried first hand with pregnancy instead of being tested prior. Mr. Gawande explains that pregnancy has become industrial in the sense that similar tools are often used for routine as well as high-risk pregnancies. The author ended his article with the birth of Dr. Rourke’s child. He explains that the baby was stuck sideways and a cesarean section was necessary in order to ensure the safety of the child. Mr. Gawande seems to suggest that cesarean sections are becoming more popular and are often the preferred method of delivery for many physicians. Physicians have reported being encouraged by their malpractice carriers as well as their patients to perform cesareans when it not clinically necessary. Whether or not natural childbirth will become obsolete remains to be seen.

Henci Goer bashes Atul Gawande’s article within her work, “How Childbirth Went Industrial: A Deconstruction.” Ms. Goer provides substantial evidence which makes the reader question the benefits of technological advancements for routine pregnancies. She explains that cesarean sections have too often become routine practice by numerous physicians. Mrs. Goer ridicules Atul Gawande for accepting cesarean sections as the answer. She explains that cesarean sections increase the death rate of the mother as well as the baby during pregnancy. The author also provides statistical analysis to substantiate her belief that technological advances, such as continuous electronic fetal monitoring and IV drips, are often used for no reason at all. She does not argue against cesarean sections, but explains that they should be limited instead of becoming common practice. She explains that Dr. Rourke most probably did need a cesarean section but this is not the case for multiple women who receive them on a daily basis.

I felt that Atul Gawande and Henci Goer both made excellent points throughout their respective articles. There have been significant technological advancements but as with most fields of medicine, they are often misused as well as overused. With limited knowledge of the field, I found Mr. Gawande’s article to be beneficial and informative. After reading Mrs. Goer’s article, one begins to question the information presented by Atul Gawande. My opinion falls somewhere between the two authors. I support the use of technology, such as IV drips and/or electronic fetal monitoring, recognizing that they pose little risk to the patient and offer great benefit in a crisis. On the other hand, I believe that cesarean sections are often overused. One must remember that cesarean sections are major abdominal surgery. Cesarean sections are of great benefit when a mother and/or baby are a risk. A physician should not perform a cesarean section because of convenience to his/her schedule or preference of a malpractice carrier. Instead, it should be based on the safety of the mother and the child. It is important to remember that childbirth is a natural occurrence. If a mother chooses not to have medical intervention that is her choice, as long no medical risk is evident. After reading both of these articles, it is evident that there are pros and cons with technological advancements. The question becomes how and when to use this technology in order to ensure healthy mothers and healthy babies.

confusion

I was a bit confused at the end of Gawande's article. At first I assumed he was going to be denouncing the idea of industrializing childbirth, the very nature of the word "industrializing" stirs negative connotations. Throughout the article he flip-flops a bit through differing opinions, seemingly never taking a hard stance. He clearly knows what he's talking about, as he describes in details many different methods of childbirth and the history of the subject, as well the story of the Rourke family interwoven through the text was a nice touch,  the prose flowing and interesting. Mrs. Rourke is very firm in her stance that she doesn't want drugs or a C-section, so the fact that Gawande is telling her story made me think that he was of similar opinion on the subject, that these are bad paths to take. Then he launches into his discussion of C-sections and their reliability, but never really draws to a conclusion, should we follow the path most traveled? Or should we continue to be innovative and try new things? Rourke ends up taking the drugs and having the C section, her and her baby turn out better than fine. So then I wonder, is Gawande advocating for this decision? Then we learn that Rourke was really torn up about her "failure" to stick to her original plan. The message being sent is never quite clear to me. Perhaps Gawande does this intentionally, or maybe I'm not analyzing the text well enough. This, in turn, made the second article more difficult for me to get through because I wasn't sure if all of Goer's attacks on Gawande were warranted. Nonetheless, I learned  A LOT about childbirth; from forceps to midwives, that I did not know before.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Moral vs Personal Issues

Whilst reading Inga Muscio's "Abortion, Vacuum Cleaners and the Power Within", I was shocked and a bit judgemental toward her view of abortion.

I've always been pro-choice. I grew up in a Catholic household where my father and mother would wak me and my brothers up every sunday for PSR (sunday school) with church to follow. However, my mother never had a problem voicing her opinion when she disagreed with the church. My mother is strong, independent, confident and a nurse. She grew up in New Jersey City and has experienced and seen things that she hoped my brothers and I would never have to see or go through ourselves. Her experiences have made her the person she is and to a large extent the woman I am today.

I grew up believing a women's body is her business, yet at the same time I also had a skewed opinion on what that meant given different circumstances. This is probably due to my father and the conservative area I grew up in. This is why I was shocked when Inga wrote she had not one, not two but three abortions. I judged her when she said this. Wouldn't she have learned from her first if not her first two mistakes?

After thinking about my initial reaction, I realized I had no right to judge her. It went against everything my mother taught me as well as my own ideology to believe in free choice.

However, I did and still have a problem with her home remedy abortion. I know because of my mother that these remedies can be deadly if not administered properly by a medical professional. So even though I agree with Muscio that there are other methods besides the "vacuum cleaner", I think she does not put enough weight on the fact that those methods need to be seriously researched and done by a medical professional. Otherwise a women could find herself having serious complications.

While writing this and rethinking the article, I still have a hard time agreeing with everything she says. I realize I have that right just as she does to express hers and her experiences.

Life Choices

Judith Arcana, Igna Muscio, and Allison Crews, often contradict as well as support one another within their respective articles regarding abortions. In 1973, the Supreme Court’s decision of Jane Roe v. Henry Wade established a women’s right to choose. This decision continues to be revisited and debated today. Most recently, the issue of abortion was reexamined in President Obama’s health care bill. President Obama has struggled to pass various health care bills in order to help the tens of million of Americans that remain uninsured. In order for Democrats to achieve the needed number votes to pass, abortions were left on the sideline. “They agreed to a deal with opponents of abortion rights within their party to reiterate in an executive order that federal money provided by the bill could not be used for abortions, securing for Democrats the final handful of votes they needed to assure passage” (Pear A1). While abortions remain legal, affording them remains an obstacle.

Igna Muscio offers her thoughts regarding abortion within her article, “Abortion, Vacuum Cleaners, and the Power Within.” Ms. Muscio has experienced three abortions. Two of the abortions were conducted in a clinic while the third one was conducted organically, through various massages and remedies. This is what led to her opposition of clinical abortions. Ms. Muscio expresses this animosity within the beginning of her article. “I, a young lady, being of sound feminist mind and undeniably womanly body, am adamantly against clinical abortions” (Listen Up 112). Ms. Muscio is presenting a bias view. I believe that: 1) it is a pregnant women’s right to choose whether or not to have an abortion 2) it is a pregnant women’s right to choose the type of abortion that is best for her. I agree with Cait that women should be educated to the pros and cons of abortion as well the type of abortions that are available. The author’s experience should be validated. For her, she preferred an organic abortion. Other women should get to make individual, educated choices, with respect to abortion. Ms. Muscio’s time may be more effectively spent educating herself as well as others to birth control methods. As a male who is pro choice, Ms. Muscio’s article offers a narrow-minded viewpoint.

Allison Crews article, “And So I chose,” expands on her decision to be pro-woman and pro-choice. I share a similar stance with the author, who is supportive of any reproductive choice a woman chooses. Women do not need to be ridiculed for their choices. Individuals should acknowledge that they could one day be in similar shoes as the individuals who they are currently protesting. Ms. Crews clearly explains her stance on woman’s choices with regards to abortion. “Young mothers need to be supported in their choices, whatever they may be. Whether they elect to abort a pregnancy, to place a child for adoption or to raise their children, resources to help young women make and cope with their choices need to be readily available” (Listen Up 143). Women need to be educated and then supported, regardless of their choice.

individuality

In Igna Muscio's essay she touches on an idea that is absent in mainstream conversation but, I believe, is vital to any efforts for change.  "In this society we look to the outside for just about everything: love, entertainment, well-being, self-worth and health. We stare into the TV instead of speaking of our own dreams, wait for a vacation instead of appreciating each day, watch the clock rather than listen to our hearts. Every livelong day we are bombarded with realities from the outside world, seemingly nonstop... One hardly has the opportunity to look inside for peace and love and other nice things like that"(p.164). This type of discourse is not commonplace which is why it struck my attention whilst reading her essay. At the outset I expected this to be an overly-"preachy" couple of pages drenched in anti-abortion sentiments. But Muscio took this article to a different place, once which I very much enjoyed. In our society, we look outwards for everything, which inadvertently means society is controlling the majority of our lives. Sean, the energy healer I wrote about in previous blogs, discussed this notion with me. He spoke with me about how if we focus heavily on the outer world, we are putting our lives in the hands of unknown sources. For example if we can only find self-worth in the eyes of others, we are missing out an the most important person, oneself. Abortion is clearly a personal issue, but it has been made public by all of the controversy surrounding it. Once a method of abortion become the "norm" it became widely practiced, and rarely does anyone stop to question western medicine, though nearly all of us have experienced its faults. Personally I had no idea that there were other methods of aborting a fetus other than the "vacuum cleaner." I don't know enough about this remedies to speak on them, but I continue to be shocked at how much new information I've learned since taking this class and reading these essays. Why so many of this topics are silenced in our society remains a mystery. 

In our society, all of the focus that is placed on the "group" as opposed to the "individual" and the ever-blurry line between  public and private, is detrimental to us all. Placing more attention on your personal health, well-being, and happiness, and worrying less about what everyone else around you is doing can vastly improve your life, it sounds simple but its true.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

The importance to belong

Finding your place and trying to fit in can be extremely difficult, but for Latina teens this process has become deadly. Christina Hernandez’s article “Sound the Alarm” in Latina Magazine reveals an ugly truth. While waiting for meeting, I picked up the magazine and was shocked to read, “One in seven Latina teenagers will attempt suicide. Not only has this trend remained steady for more than a decade, but also the rate is higher than those of white or black teens. (Hernandez, 76).

Finding your place in a new culture while holding on to your roots has been the main reason why Latinas are the highest group of teens attempting suicide. “While the reasons vary, Zayas found that most often the cause for a Latina’s suicide attempt was an ongoing struggle between a teen who wants freedom to express herself… and parents who won’t allow such independence.” (Hernandez, 76). Most teens of any race go through a similar rebellious stage, however the clash is more pronounced and devastating for immigrant families where parents try to hold on to traditional values and instill these values onto their daughters. While at the same time, daughters, often first-generation, yearn for a modern American life. A life where they fit in. Often fitting in means giving up or ignoring your traditional values and this leaves teens feeling resentful, confused, ashamed, ashamed for feeling ashamed along with countless other feelings.

Hernandez states that family is a key factor in young Latinas’ lives. “Family rifts affect young Latinas more profoundly than peer conflicts.” (Hernandez, 77). On top of this, Latina parents often have a hard time understanding why their daughters are feeling and acting out in such a deadly manner. “Immigrant parents who felt they gave up so much to bring their daughter to a better life in the United States sometimes have difficulty understanding what prompted the suicide attempt.” (Hernandez, 77). Thus therapy is multidimensional. Government officials from California to New York are providing grants for Latina suicide prevention programs and are holding hearings on the problem.

Through the research a special program has been designed to help teens. It involves counseling for the teen, the parents, and most programs include training sessions and English lessons for parents. These programs are geared toward building communication within the family. By educating parents on the issue for why their daughters feel the way they do and providing parents with job training as well as English lessons, a transition is able to happen and an understanding begins.

The problem that this article raises is one that I believe Kenji Yoshino would understand. Even though his article, “Gay Passing”, is about his struggle to find his place as a gay man, which is clearly different than young Latina’s trying to find theirs, there is a similarity- fitting in and finding one’s own place. He actually acknowledges that all people have secrets and “closet” selves and we are all “passing” in a world where we may not believe we fit in. (Yoshino, 73).

What is important to realize is that we are all unique and to feel like we have to pass, or converge is ridiculous. “Fitting in” means that we believe there is only one-way to be. This is ridiculous. How boring would the world be if we were all the same? We must accept our difference, embrace and celebrate them! As long as no one is hurting another by being himself or herself, than we should not push for people to be the same. We must tear down the belief that there is only one right way to be, and to be that way is the only way to be happy. “So long as there is a right to be a particular kind of person, I believe it logically and morally follows there is a right to say what one is.”(Yoshino, 70). Kenji Yoshino acknowledges the fact that we are all different and certain people are allowed to express their differences, while others are not or are only allowed to show a piece of himself or herself. He says that as long as one person is allowed to be himself or herself fully, than all people should be allowed to be himself or herself fully. So what is to be done to help first-generation Latinas know that it is okay that they and their families are different than “society”? The answer lies in all of us. It is up to all of us, we must be courageous and stand up for something that we may think is silly. We must not let things pass. We must fix our “programming” as Ellen Neuborne puts it.

The article encompasses a lot of different things we have discussed in class. My conclusion is based off our own class challenge, to stick up for what we believe is right. It is just another way we can better our lives as well as others. I was pleased to read that there are many clinics available for Latina teens to go to to seek help and learn how to deal with “fitting in”. On face value this issue may seem silly to some. Yet, humans are social creatures. We are a people who look for belonging and to not belong, as is seen in this article, can be deadly for those who feel alone.

(Unfortunately I was unable to find this article on Latina.com, but it was published in their March 2010 issue.)

Saturday, March 20, 2010

News Flash: From Fantasy to Fact

Andrew Adam Newman discusses advertisements for feminine care products and the innovative changes that have been made by Kotex within his article, “Rebelling Against the Commonly Evasive Feminine Care Ad.” Kotex, a feminine care brand that has existed for over ninety years, recently introduced a unique marketing approach for a new line of products, U. A commercial for U that aired on March 15, has created controversy from the media. The commercial by Kotex, ridiculed Kotex’s previous advertisements. Feminine authors, such as Anne Fausto-Sterling and Gloria Steinem, would most probably support this more realistic campaign.

The commercial opens with a quite attractive young actress in her early twenties being asked how she feels about her period. She responds, “How do I feel about my period? I love it.” The commercial continues with her dialogue in which she discusses activities she is motivated to participate in during menstruation. She states that during her period her interests vary from running on the beach to dancing with friends. As she speaks of these desires, clips from previous Kotex ads are aired that coincide with her comments. The commercial concludes with blue liquid being poured on a pad with which the actress responds, “Oh, that’s what’s supposed to happen.” The advertisement then asks the audience why tampon ads are so ridiculous. Following this question, Kotex introduces its new line of products, U.

This commercial mocked past advertisements by Kotex in order to acknowledge their previous mistakes as well as their new approach. Some of the past commercials that were ridiculed had been shown as recently as 2009. The campaign slogan for Kotex’s product U is “Why are tampon ads so ridiculous?” A shift in Kotex’s approach to its consumers is quite evident. Andrew Muerer, vice president for North American feminine, adult, and senior care for Kotex’s parent company, Kimberly-Clark, explains this within an interview. “We’re turning the light on ourselves, and we’re not saying, look at what other people do. We’re saying look at what we’ve done in the past, which typifies everyone in the category” (Newman B3). Advertisements for feminine care products too often use euphemisms and avoid facts. Meanwhile, women are often left feeling isolated, uneducated, and misunderstood. A period, historically, has remained a secret which has rarely been discussed beyond closed doors.

Kotex has initiated a new campaign, which better educates women with respect to their menses. Elissa Stein, co-author of the book Flow: The Cultural Story of Menstruation, explains that advertisements for feminine care products too often separate women from the truths regarding menstruation. “You never see a bathroom, you never see a woman using a product. They never show someone having cramps or her face breaking out or tearful — it’s always happy, playful, sporty women” (Newman B3). While Mr. Muerer explains that Kotex is taking a new approach, the advertisements presented on television provide limited factual information. Therefore, Kotex developed a website to educate interested individuals with respect to puberty and menstruation. In addition, Kotex urges visitors of its website, UbyKotex.com, to sign a “Declaration of Real Talk.” This vow says that one will defy societal pressures by openly talking about menstruation. For every woman to sign this vow, Kotex donates one dollar to the Girls for a Change foundation. Kotex’s campaign is unprecedented in menstrual product marketing. The website offers detailed explanations and videos about how to use their products as well as factual information about menstrual cycles. Information about changes during male puberty is also included in order both broaden and further educate the site’s audience. Kotex has developed future advertisements that are expected to air within the next month to accompany this campaign. Kotex’s marketing campaign seems to be a step in the right direction. The secrets of menstruation are now being opened to the public. A questions arises is how to successful do this and still maintain respectful privacy.

Anne Fausto-Sterling analyzes menstruation, Premenstrual Syndrome (PMS), and menopause, within her chapter, “Hormonal Hurricanes: Menstruation, Menopause, and Female Behavior.” She offers past research regarding menstruation and explains that more credible studies need to be conducted. “Reading through the morass of poorly done studies on menstruation and menopause, many of which express deep hatred and fear of women, can be a discouraging experience. One begins to wonder how it can be that within so vast a quantity of material so little qualities exists” (Fuasto-Sterling 121). Previous research concluded that women’s potentials were limited because of physical and psychological handicaps related to menses. This premise is beginning to be recognized as false, although much societal bias still exists. Fausto-Sterling argues that more factual information needs to be readily available and that women need to openly discuss their bodies. Menstruation should not equate as a shameful secret. Menstruation is a natural process that varies amongst women. This being true, numerous similarities do exist. Women need to be informed regarding the commonalities of menses and differentiate when/if abnormal symptoms occur. One could speculate that Fausto-Sterling would support Kotex’s U campaign. Kotex’s new marketing approach is a positive step for the public.

Gloria Steinem discusses the triangular relationship between advertisements, print (newspapers/magazines), and readers within her article, “Sex, Lies & Advertising.” In her article, Ms. Steinem focuses on her experience as the founding editor and publisher of the women’s magazine Ms. Ms. Steinem’s approach can easily be applied to television advertisements. The author acknowledges that media requires money in order to function, which is commonly provided via advertisements. Unfortunately, this allows for companies to exert certain influence over media. Therefore, numerous advertisements portray bias information with the sole purpose of selling a product. It could be hypothesized that Ms. Steinem would welcome Kotex’s new advertising campaign as a step in the right direction. Past commercials, which showed blue liquid being poured on a pad, provided little or no benefit to the viewer. Ms. Steinem asks a question at the end of her article, “Can’t we do better than this?” (Steinem 10). Perhaps Kotex recognizes that they can do better which has resulted in them shifting their marketing approach.

The goal of advertising is to sell a product. Many advertisements do not even refer to the product directly. This misrepresentation of information is not just a problem within feminine care products but advertising at large. As laws and rules change, marketing has become more informative to the consumer but additional steps are still needed. Kotex is self-ridiculing with respect to their past campaigns. This shift in advertising, by Kotex, may be reflective of their increased respect for women. As women become educated consumers their interest in buying products which disrespect their intelligence decreases. Questions arise. Is this campaign shift by Kotex reflective of a new respect for women and their intelligence or simply a more effective marketing approach? Companies only survive when consumers purchases their products. A more honest, educational approach is welcome, independent of motivating factors.




Past Kotex Commercials:

Commercial 1

Commercial 2

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

News Flash : Vadge Homogeneity

 Throughout the course of this semester I’ve noticed the alarming trend of an increased desire for homogeneity amongst women. Be it the clothes we wear, the style of our hair, or even, the aesthetics of our genitalia.  The article I’ve chosen, “The Vagina Dialogues” By Johanna Gohmann, displays how utterly ridiculous society has become in its venture to make the beautifully diverse human race into identical robots. Gohmann’s article takes a look into the growing trend for undergoing “vagioplasty”, reconstructive surgery done to remove or re-sculpt the labia to achieve the “ideal vagina.” The surgery  has immense popularity in the UK and the numbers are increasing in the US as well. The vast majority of women say they partake in the surgery for “cosmetic” reasons, while others say it enhances their sexual experience. However, there is no medical study that confirms this result. In reality the issue has less to do with physical discomfort during sex, and more to do with self-consciousness.  Why is it that all these women desire the “Designer Vagina”? This new trend is yet another example of our society pushing “norms” onto us that don’t exist. Normalcy is in the eye of the beholder, the real issue is that this is a silenced discussion; the lack of awareness of the fact that there is no “normal” vagina has led to this bizarre trend.

    The enormous increase in the number of women undergoing cosmetic surgery is an issue in and of itself. The fact that women feel they must endure copious amounts of pain to achieve an unnatural image is outlandish. Who decided that beauty must equal pain? It is incredibly frightening that most women who have vagioplasty put down cosmetics as their incentive. In Gohmann’s article she explains how nearly all women seeking this surgery bring in photographs of porn stars and reference these women's labia as their end goal.  “Docs concur that porn is the gold standard. Gang Alter is a Beverly Hills-based surgeon who has perfected his own ‘Alter Labia Minoria Countouring Technique.’ He says ‘ The widespread viewing of pornographic photos and videos has lead to a marked rise in female genital cosmetic surgery. Women are more aware of differences in genital appearance, so they wish to achieve their perceived  aesthetic ideal’”(pg.1, Gohmann.) As we discussed in previous classes, porn is not real, its fiction. These women are picked to be on the screen because they look the way they do, and if they don’t fit that look, many times they are airbrushed and blurred in order to fit an image. But in todays society we continue to confuse what we see in the media with reality, its almost as if the media is more present in our lives than reality is. “While lesbians are probably a bit more informed, many women aren’t familiar with the look of regular, everyday vaginas, which come in an endless range of shapes and sizes. If you’re straight, its very likely your vadge knowledge is limited to a squat with a hand mirror or Jenna Jameson”(pg.2, Gohmann.) This displays how dangerous silence and ignorance can be. If women were comfortable enough to discuss this topic, perhaps they wouldn’t be so entranced by the “playboy”-looking vagina.

   The women who don’t say cosmetics are their motive claim that they get the surgery to enhance their sexual experience. This is where the issue gets tricky. “In 2004, Dr. Laura berman, director of the Berman Center (a treatment clinic for female sexual dysfunction) completed a study on the relationship between women’s genital self image and their sexual function. She surveyed 2,206 women and not surprisingly found that they way you feel about your vadge plays a big part in how much you enjoy sex”(pg.3, Gohmann). For women, much of their sexual experience is  “cerebral” meaning their enjoyment depends a lot on how they personally feel about their bodies. Gohmann then poses the question; why are we dealing with these women’s sexual dissatisfaction with a scalpel when it’s a mental and emotional issue, not a physical one? The reason is that dealing with the cerebral aspect of the issue is far more difficult and time consuming (this procedure is under an hour) then working “inside the system” and “trimming away the ‘ugly bits’”(pg3, Gohmann). I found this theme to be strikingly similar to the issues of intersex genital “corrective” surgery. Countless people who are born intersex have been forced into a gender role through surgery on their genitalia in an effort to make them fit with the “norm.” But these norms are social constructions, as is the notion that there is a “normal” looking vagina.

     “Until very recently the specter of intersexuality has spurred us to police bodies of indeterminate sex. Rather than force us to admit the social nature of our ideas about sexual difference, our ever more sophisticated medical technology has allowed us, by its attempts to render such bodies male or demale, to insist that people are either naturally male or female. Such insistence occurs even though intersexual births occur with remarkably high frequency and may be on the increase. The paradoxes inherent in such reasoning, however, continue to haunt mainstream medicine, surfacing over and over in both scholarly debates and grossroots activitism around sexual identities”(pg.54, Fausto-Sterling).

This desire for normalcy is taking us down a scary road. Fortunately efforts for change are being made.

    The New View Campaign is a group that strives to “challenge the medicalization of sex.” Many of their efforts involve opening up a dialogue amongst women so their most prominent resource of information isn’t their television. “Its latest efforts include the International Vulva Knitting Circle, a playful way to bring women together to talk about their bodies and knit vulvas”(pg.5, Gohmann.) Talking is the first step to eliminating ignorance, which can help put an end to this misguided trend. The New View also has a website, http://www.fsd-alert.org/default.asp which has links to books and videos that provide important information on women’s sexual health. This video posted below is a look into the mission of the New View Campaign. /p>

 

   British Artist Jamie McCartney is currently working on a project called “Design a Vagina” in an effort to display publicly the wide variety of vaginal appearances. He was quoted in this article and I believe he pinpoints a key message, “everyone is different and everyone is normal”(pg.5, Gohmann). Continued efforts such as Mccartney’s are the only way to end this vaginal confusion.

This Article can be found in Bust magazine's June 2009 issue, or simply follow this link http://www.bust.com/component/option,com_zine/Itemid,273/id,2/view,article/