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.