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. 

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.

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.

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.