Exploitation in the name of Globalization

We learned in “Sex, Lies, and Advertising” that men control and own most of the forms of media. Since the system of patriarchy gives men the power they use media as a forum to push their ideals and promote patriarchy. Men are doing this and expanding it to Asia and calling it globalization. In “The Curious Feminist” Cynthia Enloe talks about athletic companies who have moved their companies to Asia in order to cut costs on labor. In the capitalist system the only thing that matters is the bottom line which is money. This allows corporations and companies to disregard everything and everyone because at the end of the day they are trying to increase their profit and if that means exploiting people to do so they will. In “The Globetrotting Sneaker” we see that Nike and Reebok moved their companies manufacturing plants to Taiwan and South Korea. They began hiring young women to work in these factories for far less than they would pay American woman workers. While these countries do have a philosophy which tell woman to do their duty and be a “good daughter” and the way to do this is to go work in theses factories. Then when women began to unionize and demand more money in these factories these American sneaker companies began to move to other Asian countries where they can get “cheapened labor”. The price of someone’s labor is not merely cheap because of their standard of living as these countries would lead us to believe but because they want to increase their profit they “cheapen” these women’s labor. Once the companies moved to nearby China and Indonesia the government of these places began to see that if they “if woman can be kept hard at work, low-paid, and unorganized the can serve as a magnet for foreign investors”. This idea keeps women down and allows them to be exploited because it generates money for their country. The government makes them believe that they are doing their “feminine duty”.
In the first ad is from Reebok and it says “Chinese New Year: Year of the Rat”. The ad depicts a rat next to a new Rebook shoe and fireworks in the background. In the United States this advertisement would be seen as promoting diversity and globalization but the problem is that they are marketing to the same countries that they exploit to produce this sneaker. This is an example of how not only does Reebok go to these Asian countries and exploits the women workers but they then create ads marketed to these countries so that they worker now has to become the consumer. As a worker they are not paid enough to purchase the same thing that they are producing. This is almost taunting to these women who work in these factories for ten cents a hour. Some of these women are single mothers and to have their children ask them to buy them a shoe that costs 46 dollars and they made that same shoe and got paid so much less is horrible and really telling to how much their labor is cheapened. There is pressure on the public of China to purchase these shoes. If Reebok only sold to United States that would be better than selling to the countries who manufacture the shoes and asking them to pay the same amount Americans pay for them. The fact that they companies can even do this is unbelievable. If the women create labor unions and strike then the companies may leave and they will lose their job so they don’t have many options. These women are in a double bind. The progression of women in these countries are combated by these American corporations who use patriarchy to make a profit.
The other two ads I found depict women wearing Reebok clothes and shoes. These ads depict women as strong and as “more than just a cover story”. They both use famous actresses to sell the brand. In one ad it’s Scarlett Johansson and in the other one it is Bipasha Basu a Bollywood Actress. Women are seen as strong and beautiful to sell the brand. Scarlett is a Hollywood star and is used to get other women to buy Reebok because she is wearing it also it promotes women are “much more than a cover story” but they can be athletic too. The other ad shows Bipasha kicking a punching bag with the view of India in the background. This shows a women of color as strong and ads to the mystification of globalization. If Rebook depicts women of other ethnic descents it is believed that they are a promoter of strong women and equality for women. Then they move their factories if women form unions or strike in the countries that manufacture the sneakers. The ads make you think that Reebok aligns itself with women but what they actually are doing is exploiting women.
If we realize that injustice for women anywhere is an injustice for women anywhere we can fight to get companies to practice safe labor laws for women. We need to look past this façade that these companies present and see that we cannot have the exploitation of women and call it globalization.

The Misunderstood Beiste

Now in its second season, the television show Glee has become a hit for the Fox network. The show revolves around a high school glee club comprised of various high school stereotypes: Rachel, the drama club queen, Brittany and Santana, the cheerleaders, Finn, the quarterback, Puck, the bad boy, Kurt, the homosexual, and Mercedes, the token black girl. Some attribute the show’s popularity to the music singles released every episode, but most would agree audiences tune in every week for the witty social commentary. “The result of all this cliché-lifting should be a mess. Instead, it’s an exhilarating hour satirizing American socialization processes, with a wicked soundtrack.” http://www.popmatters.com/pm/review/93526-glee/

The topics discussed on the show range from trivial high school problems (how to regain one’s popularity) to more serious issues including homophobia. The show is a virtual lightning rod for criticisms of American culture. Especially applicable are feminist theories; the women on the show frequently deal with problems with their sexuality, relationships with men, power struggles, body issues, and girl on girl competition. One particular episode is especially pertinent to feminist theories. It is the first episode of the second season when a new character, Shannon Beiste, joins the cast. http://glee.wikia.com/wiki/Shannon_Beiste

Beiste is the new female coach of the boy’s football team; she joins after the former male coach had a nervous breakdown resulting from the end of his engagement. The show continues to explain that the school has hired her because she has won 5 consecutive all Missouri football championships and the school hopes to increase alumni donations with a successful athletic program. In hopes of more wins, the school has cut funding from the glee club and the cheerleading team in order to delegate a larger portion of the budget to the football team. Sue Sylvester, the cheerleading coach, and Will Schuester, the glee club leader, hope to regain their funding by making Beiste miserable and forcing her to leave the school.
With a 6’3” frame and muscular build, Beiste is a formidable woman. She has a cropped short haircut, wears a tracksuit, and her only visible makeup is tacky red lipstick. Her name alone, pronounced like “beast”, distances her from traditional femininity. Furthermore, as a football coach, she holds a position very few women do. Beiste therefore challenges all traditional female norms and her coworkers are not afraid to point it out, “Female football coach, like a male nurse, sin against nature.”
www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLq4ilmZ5aQ
Applying feminist theory, we can understand Sylvester and Schuester as trying to reinforce patriarchal social norms via ridicule because “A woman who- not deliberately or defiantly, but just because of who she was- challenged the very foundations of patriarchy and consumerism, gave men, in particular, the heebie- jeebies” (Douglas 73). Moreover, the fact that a female coworker is mainly responsible for the taunting goes to show that it is the patriarchal system responsible for enforcing these social norms, not necessarily just men. Men and woman are taught at a young age to act a certain way, “it is supposed to be second nature for straight men and women to constantly make sure that we are marked as members of one sex and not the other” (Douglas 72). Nonconformists that gain power threaten the stability of the patriarchal system and therefore anyone that defies these norms is henceforth shunned by “normal” men and women
Susan Douglas writes about a similar case that occurred for Janet Reno. Reno was an accomplished attorney general that won various awards and had an extremely high approval rating. Yet, she was forced to endure endless taunting. This was not the typical political ridicule, and was aimed directly at her sexuality. “The jokes which sought to tame her in three basic ways. The first was to suggest that she was more mannish than any man…The second was to undermine her power by sexualizing her…the third was to fantasize that her refusal to ‘just say yes’ to femininity left her hopelessly lonely, desperate for love, and desperate for sex,” (Dougls 73). The last way that Janet Reno was targeted was exactly the tactic used in Glee. Schuester and Sylvester enact “Operation Mean Girls” in order to make Beiste horribly lonely. In one scene, Beiste enters the faculty break room and asks Sylvester if she can share a table. Sylvester unabashedly remarks back that her ghost friends are sitting there. Schuester also refuses her a spot at his table. Sylvester refers to this as “good old fashioned school yard bullying.” She purposefully drives to make Beiste feel like an outsider that is unwelcome at school because of her anti-feminine ways. Sylvester even goes so far as to say, “I know gals like Beiste, her high school life must have been miserable. Oversized, humorless, refers to herself in the third person like an animal. This kind of abuse will bring back all those childhood memories and she’ll be shaken to her core. Humiliated, devastated, she’ll have no choice but to quit her job.” Sylvester is therefore capitalizing on the childish teasing that an outsider like Beiste would have endured. Sylvester knows that because Beiste is not the typical high school girl, she must have endured endless bullying, she is exploiting social norms to manipulate Beiste.
To some extent it seems like the teasing does affect Beiste. Initially, she accepts the pranks with a dignified smile and does not retaliate. When Will refuses her a seat at his table she quietly remarks that she expected more from him and was greatly disappointed in his behavior. As the episode continues it is clear that the taunting is affecting her. She sheds a tear alone in the locker room just as one of her students enters with a snarky sexist joke, “You guys know why Helen Keller couldn’t drive right? Because she was a woman!” In the same scene, Beiste finally cracks. When a student asks Beiste if a handicapped classmate can join the team, Beiste feels that she is being mocked and undermined. She throws the student out of the locker room and kicks him off the team. Beiste therefore exhibits the typical over emotional reactions associated with female stereotypes. Such an emotional outburst makes her seem ridiculous and completely unreasonable- unfit for coaching. Furthermore, the juxtaposition of the stereotypical female response with her masculine demeanor makes her even more of a social outcast; she’s almost a man but deep down is still a woman.
Ultimately, Beiste conquers Schuester’s hatred and teaches him a valuable lesson. Schuester realizes at lunch the errors of his way when he refuses Beiste a seat and she replies, “You think its easy being a female football coach? Being different? You think I don’t get this everywhere I go?” He begins to feel sympathetic and hesitates before participating further in “operation mean girls.” Beiste finally changes Schuester after she dismisses the student from the football team. Schuester stands up for the student, claiming that Beiste should give him a chance because he is really a good kid. Beiste retaliates, “you mean don’t make a snap judgment about how he is? Don’t make his life miserable because you assume he’s a certain way?” Schuester realizes that he had been unfairly treating Beiste and it is not right to treat people cruelly because they are different and therefore somehow bad. Schuester publicly denounces Sylvester and her “operation mean girls.”
Thankfully, Glee ended on a positive note and the teasing will decrease for Beiste. Unfortunately, the real world is not the same. Women are constantly being chastised if they do not obey the standards of femininity as set by societal norms. Any woman that does not conform to these norms is deemed a social outcast because they are a threat to the patriarchal system currently in place. Their ambiguous nature, if accepted, could crumble the entire socialization process; therefore, men and women that partake in the system restore order by ostracizing the “outsiders”. If we somehow hope to end such bullying, we must abolish standards for genders and let individuals develop without societal influence.

Media Project: Miley Cyrus' Music Video "Can't be Tamed"

As an up and coming young female star, Miley Cyrus has become a role model for young girls and teenagers everywhere. Miley Cyrus jumpstarted her career as the star of “Hannah Montana,” a hit Disney Channel show. On the show she showcases her talent as an innocent girl trying to balance her life as a famous pop star and her normal life at home, trying to survive the social juggle of high school. The plot line for “Hannah Montana” actually seems to foreshadow Miley Cyrus’ real life and her struggle to maintain a normal childhood and adolescent years, while pursuing an acting and singing career. As many young Hollywood stars experience, Miley Cyrus has felt the pressure to grow up quickly and unfortunately in the public eye. Recently, Miley Cyrus has tried to change her innocent image into a racier and more mature one. Following in the footsteps of Britney Spears, another teen pop star, Miley’s wardrobe choices have become skimpier and the lyrics of her songs more provocative. Still an actress for the Disney Channel, she has received a lot of scrutiny from the media and Disney producers for her recent transition and the new image she is sending out to her adoring younger fans. Miley Cyrus’ most recent music video, “Can’t be Tamed,” has stirred up quite a scandal and has created controversy over the age appropriateness of her wardrobe, lyrics, and choreography. Miley Cyrus’ racy music video, “Can’t be Tamed,” demonstrates that she has been subject to the typical pressure young female stars feel to become overtly sexual, while still trying to advocate for female strength and independence.

At the age of seventeen, Miley Cyrus has already embraced the saying that “sex sells.” In the majority of the music video, Miley Cyrus prances around in a skimpy black leotard and feather ensemble that leaves little to the imagination. The “Can’t be Tamed” music video is definitely Miley’s way of introducing her new sexier image and telling the world that she isn’t a little girl anymore. Regardless of the way she wishes to be seen, the fact of the matter is that she is still legally a minor. The difference in the image she portrays on the Disney Channel in comparison to the one in this music video is shocking. It is sad to watch as the pressure of being a young star in Hollywood has forced her to give up her childhood innocence. Miley Cyrus seems think that she can only be taken seriously as an artist and further her career if she plays up her sexuality. Miley Cyrus is by no means the first star to undergo this rapid and premature transformation. Britney Spears is probably the most famous for her change from her days as a “Mousketeer” to the release of her first music video, “Baby one more Time,” where she danced around in a slutty school girl outfit. What is it that drove Britney and now Miley to forgo their innocence and dress up in age inappropriate outfits and provocatively dance around to their suggestive lyrics? Unfortunately, being considered sexy has become a requirement for success in the entertainment industry. In order for a star to secure her future, she must conform to the demands of the industry, even if that means rolling around on stage in next to nothing. But what does this message send to young girls, especially the hordes of Miley’s adoring fans? By producing a music video like “Can’t be Tamed,” Miley is supporting the cultural notions that being skinny, dressing skimpily, and wearing lots of makeup is the definition of beautiful and makes someone worthy of lots of attention. As the public “oohs” and “ahs” at Miley’s unveiling and then as people flock to get near her, in the video, one cannot help but be mesmerized by her desirability. Miley has the greatly sought after boobs, butt, and toned legs that Joan Brumeberg discusses in “Body Projects”. Miley Cyrus’ young fan base is particularly vulnerable to the influence of the media. If they see her wearing those types of clothes, or the exposed shape of her body, they then might begin to feel they are inadequate. Furthermore, because of Miley’s age, she sends out the message that it is acceptable to act and dress older and to be overtly sexual at such a young age. While Miley has obviously made her choice over the direction she wishes her career to go, the Disney Channel is not so pleased with her decision or the repercussions it is having on their viewers. After starting off as such a positive role model for young girls, Miley Cyrus’ increased sexual image encourages girls to either follow in her footsteps or find another, more appropriate girl to look up to.

While, Miley Cyrus plays up her sexuality in the music video, she is also demands to be respected for her independence and individuality. Her lyrics suggest that she uses her sexuality to get ahead and get what she wants. While she likes men to ogle over her attractiveness, she expects them to let her live he life and be who she wants to be. This message is a perfect example of enlightened sexism. Douglas states, “enlightened sexism is powerfully seductive, just the way the Spice Girls were: it claims you can have independence, power, and respect and male love and approval and girly, consumerist indulgences all at once, all without costs” (16). By claiming that she “can’t be tamed” all while being overtly sexual, Miley Cyrus uses her sexuality as a means of power, refusing to let men take that power away from her. In a way she is standing up against societal norms and saying that she will do and act however she wants. Whether intentional or not, she is taking the path less traveled, as described by Allan Johnson and rebelling against the patriarchal rules in place that describe the way girls her age should behave. The confinements of patriarchal society are most visibly represented by the giant birdcage Miley is trapped in at the beginning of the video. When being unveiled, she is fully objectified as a “rarest creature on earth.” At first people are in ah of her beauty, but as she begins to act up they become afraid and try to distance themselves from the cage. The use of a birdcage in the music video coincides perfectly with Marilyn Frye’s article, “Oppression.” In it, she describes the metaphor of the birdcage, “It is perfectly obvious that the bird is surrounded by a network of systematically related barriers, no one of which would be the least hindrance to its flight, but which, by their relations to each other, are as confining as the solid walls of a dungeon.” Despite disapproval from the crowd, Miley steps outside the cage and continues to demand respect. She basically says that no cage (aka man) can tame her. Regardless of the inappropriateness of her attire, Miley Cyrus does send out a positive message to young women about staying true to oneself, despite the demands put on them to change to conform to societal expectations.

With her career in the midst of a major transformation, Miley Cyrus has discovered the idea of enlightened sexism and has chosen to advocate for female strength while promoting her sexuality. Becoming a star in Hollywood at such a young age can create many issues, as they experience extreme amounts of pressure to conform to societal expectations. Hopefully, Miley Cyrus will learn from other stars’ mistakes and slow down her transformation process. Although Miley initially escapes the birdcage and announces her independence, at the end of the video she returns to the birdcage. Does this signal that her time rebelling against patriarchal oppression was short lived? If Miley Cyrus claims that she “can’t be tamed,” the question arises: is her newly hypersexual image the result of pressures from Hollywood, making her a hypocrite, or is the “real” Miley Cyrus finally making her debut?

Main Response to 10/26 Readings

The reading this week from "The Curious Feminism" were really interesting. I didn't really know how bad it was for women in factories oversees. I also didn't know it was mostly women I thought maybe men worked in the factories to. The first reading The Globetrotting Sneaker really shed light on the the sneaker industry and how they are perpetuating this overarching patriarchal system. They first went to South Korea where women's ideals of what true "femininity" is and how to be a good women included the ideals of Confucianism and allowed for them to cheapen there labor. Women in these other countries deserve proper pay and healthy work condition just as we have in America. If we have a standards in America for factories the same standards must be applied and enforced abroad. The thing that really upset and frighten me was that when women began organizing and striking the managers would send in troops who would sexually assault, strip, fondle, and rape the women. I think this is all too much for just organizing because they want to be given a decent amount of pay and better living conditions. The Nike corporation said that "If government were to allow and encourage independent labor organizing, we would be happy to support it". This doesn't hold true because when the women labor movement made some progress and were able to get a pay raise and better jobs that is when Nike began to close down all its factories in South Korea. They say that they support factory regulation and minimum wage but then if this actually happens in there oversees factory they move to a place where women would do the work for cheaper. This is exactly what these companies did at home and why they moved their factories they want to "cheapen" women labor globally. The lies these companies tell as a facade of globalization which really stands for the cheapest female labor we can find. The second reading "Daughters and Generals in the Politics of the Globalized Sneaker" talks about the author herself and how became curious to know more about these footwear corporations and how their competition can trickle down to whoever the sponsor and that makes them rivals. When you think about it the amount of power these companies have is ridiculous. The fact that they can just close down their factories in one place for any reason and open in another place gives them an advantage in controlling the livelihood of many women in other countries. When the factories leave some of these women are forced to take jobs that exploit them and their bodies but they must do this to provide for their families. They use Korean young women as pawns in industrialization and marketed to them. They convinced them to move to the cities and make money for their farmer parents because that's what a "good daughter" does. By using these ideals and changing them to fit the mold of what a young woman is they can make them do the labor for these oversees companies. On one hand women are not completely pawns but they are not completely autonomous in this exploitation. The patriarchal regime of the footwear Corporations and of their own society undermines their resistance and their voice.

Response to Readings for 10/26

Unfortunately, I was not very surprised to learn about American corporations exploiting foreign workers. It has been known for a long time that American companies establish factories in other nations to take advantage of the cheap labor opportunities; coupled with the lack of government regulations, these countries allow American corporations to produce products for pennies. Thousands of companies, like Walmart, all do this. I was a little surprised at how much the author focused on women and their role in this growing trend. From my previous understanding, men receive the same squalor treatment as female coworkers. I did not realize it could get much worse. I also found it interesting that the governments of nations like China, actively seek out to change cultural standards for women to increase the workforce and discourage equal treatment. I was shocked to read that Chinese women were encouraged to quietly accept their measly pay and horrible treatment, all in the hopes of pleasing their parents and finding a suitable husband. I suppose that in the context of Confucianism this makes sense, and as an American I should not force my cultural beliefs on such women, but I just don’t ever think the assaults and harassment that these women have experienced is ever acceptable in any culture.
I think that Americans should start speaking with their wallets and buying products that are made according to certain standards. We all have a daily impact on the economy when we chose what and where to buy our goods. If we all were a little more aware of our products we may be able to make a huge impact.

http://www.unwomen.org/

Response to Readings for 10/26

It is so disappointing to read about how American corporations, more specifically, athletic shoe producers, are responsible for the mistreatment of female workers and causing women to pit against each other. Not only are these companies exporting jobs from the United States, that women here could by employed by, but they are also exporting the jobs to countries where they know they can pay their female workers the bare minimum. It is unbelievable to think that women are getting paid less than $1 day for their hard work. Additionally the factory conditions are inhumane, and corporations like Nike sublease the factories so they are not responsible for the safety and wellbeing of the workers. After reading things like this, it’s no wonder that so many people around the world hate Americans. Here these companies are making poverty stricken women produce shoes that cost more than they make in several months. I found it really interesting to read that in some places women banned together to unionize and fight for better working conditions. And its even more surprising that they were success. In once case women were able to significantly increase their wages. Another point I found interesting was when they mentioned that in 1995 that Asian women tried to get the United Nations involved to regulate their working conditions and the treatment of women. I just recently read article that focused on the new foundation of a sector of the UN dedicated to women, called, “UN Women.” I have attached the link to the website. Maybe with the creation of this sector, women around the world will be able to gain greater global equality especially in the work place.

Response to Sara

I found the article, “Sex, Lies, and Advertising” particularly interesting because it is an issue that has bothered me for a long time. I frequently read magazines and have begun to question the validity of the articles inside because of the ulterior motives behind the magazines. Magazines, do in fact exist to make money and they do so by selling advertisements. There are occasionally informational pieces within that add legitimacy to the circulation, but I have noticed more and more of the magazine space being dedicated to advertisements. Unfortunately, such advertisements are growing sneakier, and creeping into locations you wouldn’t expect. Fashion ads are usually easy to detect, but more cosmetic companies are advertising their products in make-over articles, new looks for the season, and how to fix trouble areas. I rely on magazines for objective evaluations of products and it concerns me that the article may bend their opinions based on ad sales. Is Revlon really the best mascara to buy or did they spend an extra five grand? I am not so much concerned with faulty make up information, and instead with the dangerous precedent this sets for the rest of the magazine. More and more corporations have certain expectations when they invest money in an advertisement. They control where their ads are placed within the publication, and if something is published that is deemed “inappropriate” for the product the ad is pulled. Magazines are then forced to decide between turning a profit and their freedom of press. I am afraid that magazines are going to become completely controlled by various corporations and all the articles within will be subtle advertisements. Freedom of the press is essential to our democracy and we must maintain the integrity of our magazines through which we spread information. If we lose magazines to big time companies, we will lose a legitimate source of information and again be clouded by companies through the media

Readings for 10/21

Although this set of readings does not have a strong overriding theme, they all focus on the perception of women by society. In the article by Gloria Steinem, “Sex, Lies & Advertising,” she discusses the difficulties in securing advertisements in feminist magazines, more specifically in Ms. Many producing corporations are hesitant to buy advertisement space in these types of magazines because they have this preconceived notion that women will not respond to their products, and their money spent on the advertisement will go to waste. Whether it is a food, clothing, car, or toiletry or cosmetic companies, very few were willing to buy into the magazine. What was most surprising was Este Lauder’s refusal to buy advertisement space in such a magazine because its audience was not viewed as feminine enough. This is particularly interesting, given that a woman started Este Lauder. Furthermore, only feminine cigarette brands were truly willing to advertise in Ms. Even though this article was written in 1990, it goes to show that feminism was developing a negative rap even back then. Then Joan Brumberg, in her article, “Body Projects,” discusses the beginning time in the 1920s when teenage girls really started freaking out about their physical appearance and how it has transitioned over time. The Roaring 20s dismissed the ideal Victorian body image and replaced it with svelte and stick-like ideology of what the perfect body type was. Having curves was no longer acceptable. She followed some girls’ dietary strategy of how to get thin. Next came the rising interest and obsession with breasts. The idea was the bigger the better, and people began to notice less about the size of women’s waists. Brumberg also looked at the historical significance of bras. Once deemed unnecessary, the bra and the girdle became an instant must have to lift and control. After that the author looked at the more recent development over the rise of the “hard body” and the focus on thighs, hips and butts. Deemed the new problem area, women now tirelessly work to tone these regions to fit the model of what is sexy. The author ends by writing about the rise of tattoos and piercings. She states that they seem to be a means of rebellion. Through tracing perceptions of the female body throughout time, Brumberg brings attention women’s susceptibility to society pressures to fit the model of what is beautiful regardless of the time period. Alisa Valdes in “Ruminations of a Feminist Fitness Instructor” discusses her struggle to pursue her dreams of becoming a feminist, while burden by the financial incentives to teach aerobics. An aerobics instructor most of her life (because the pay is good), Valdes is conflicted over the notions that aerobics is sexist and plays to the objectification of women. Unable to pay off her debt, she is forced to continue teaching despite her conscious. Eventually she is able to find work elsewhere, and escape the anti-feminist morays of aerobics.

The aerobics and “Body Project” articles were the most interesting. Both writings mentioned the issue of class and race. It is refreshing that some people are actually addressing this issue. It is very true that a lot of the issues mentioned in both articles are not universal across the different classes and races. The only issue I had was in the aerobics article was when she said that only the rich are able to actually pursue their true career interests. Overall I really enjoyed these readings.

Short Response for 10/20 readings

These readings gave a lot of insight on how these different retail markets and companies reinforce the body project and why women feel as though they are never good enough. The first reading "Body Projects" by Joan Brumberg documents the change in girls and women's body image from the 1920's until today and how that has changed. The industry she most talked about was the bra and "junior figure control" ones. These boomed once undergarments weren't made by hand anymore and were mass produced so that women had to go shopping and also became more self conscious of their chests. The change in the underwear industry gave a rise in the sexualization of the female body and more the young girl body. The conversation went from what books girls were reading to what cup size you were. This increasing sexualization of the young female body caused girls to become a lot more insecure and associated external shortcomings with internal image. This caused women to want to lose weight and count calories to lose weight which then progressed into young women now going to the gym five times a week to lose weight now. This bring me to the next reading about the fitness industry. Alisa Valdez in her story "Ruminations of a Feminist Fitness Instructor" spoke about how she could be a fitness instructor and still be a feminist. In the end she realized she could not participate in this industry because what it promotes is the insecurity of women with their bodies and even though she didn't believe that was right she couldn't separate it from the classes she did at the gyms. It is impossible to use this fitness industry that perpetuates that women bodies need to be improved to empower them. It is counteractive and problematic. She realized that she must use another route. The last article "Sex,Lies, and Advertising" by Gloria Steinem showed how the advertising companies worked against women magazines and if you wanted to have quality content within these magazines you had to sellout to companies that actually were harmful to women. This look into how women magazines work gave some insight into why Cosmo and Seventeen are how they are now and why there are few feminist publications now. The sad part is the magazine industry made for us essentially by us is causing more and more women to have lower self-esteem and distorted self images.

Response to Carolyn 10/18

The readings for this week were really interesting. First Susan Douglas' chapter in Enlightened Sexism talked about the correlation of lean and mean. The impossible expectation that the media and the model industry puts on girls and women are impossible. The fact that plastic surgery has gone up in this country is no surprise. Even celebrities face this constant ridicule of their bodies. In "Keeping up with the Kardashians" Kim is told by her mom and sister that she should get Botox because she starting to get wrinkles. Kim's face is pretty much flawless and she doesn't even have wrinkles but because her mom and sister suggested it she goes and gets it done and has a really bad reaction to it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N0myCkoa4U This is an example of how surgery Botox and methods like these are not a magic bullet. The effects of these surgeries can be damaging and lead to more surgeries. The example of girls taking their frustration out on other girls is not new. In Mean Girls there is a need to be thin because if your not you can't shop at exclusive stores live 1-3-5 or you can shop at Sears. Scenes like this stay in the minds of young impressionable girls and they think that if they are not this size the will be ridiculed or not popular. This also reminds me of the comedian/actress's book Monique. The book is entitle "Skinny Women are Evil". In this book she also makes the correlation that thin women are mean because they starve themselves. I think if there were more positive women role models out there who are healthy and happy and movies about that so many people would be encouraged to love themselves at every weight but instead we have the billion dollar diet industry and media has to reinforce that thinness equals happiness or does it. In the other article about PMS this is so interesting as I was reading this article my mine went to how guys always use it as an excuse when the women in their life are angry or something they say things like are you PMSing or is it that time of the month. I think that PMS may be a real condition but it can be combated by things like your diet and it is not an excuse to use when you don't want to go to work. Many women don't show symptoms of PMS and others do and some may be psychosomatic and others may actually experience these symptom with no expectations. I know that if it is actually going to be used as a diagnosis there must be more studies done on it and not just the usual inefficient experiment but one with applicable results.

http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1172940870l/231878.jpg

Response to 10/18

Douglas’s chapter, “Lean and Mean” raises some really good points that I think the majority of us can relate to. The media is so influential over what the ideal body type is, and unfortunately that body type is a rare natural gift and otherwise hard to achieve. The heightened number of women and girls resulting to plastic surgery is frightening. The fact that girls under the age of 18 are now undergoing breast augmentation is ridiculous. But sadly this is a result of societal pressures to have the perfect body, aka be a size zero and have DD boobs. Our cultural is enthralled by the idea of the perfect body, which is evident by the television shows we watch. I fully admit that I have watched my fair share of Extreme Makeover and What Not to Wear, but until reading this chapter, I never really thought about the message behind these shows. Shows like these suggest that fixing someone’s appearance will make them happy and satisfied. In reality this quick fix just puts a cover over someone’s deep down issues that clearly need to be addressed other then by a makeover. Furthermore, these support the message that one can only be considered beautiful if they fit the mainstream mold. Both readings also talk about the fear of aging and the body’s steady decline in years, whether physically or medically. In our society there is also such a fear of aging. Nothing but negative connotations are associated with becoming older. Aging women then once again feel the need to reverse the effects of aging by resulting to plastic surgery, Botox, and collagen injections, basically anything to look young again. I think it’s important to bring attention to a rising phenomenon, “The Cougar.” These women have managed to beat the odds and still remain desirable to younger men. But what price do they pay to keep up their looks? It is rumored that Demi Moore, the most famous cougar of them all, had up to 40 procedures before her big reveal around her 40^th birthday. I guess it worked because she managed to snag Ashton Kutcher. When it comes down to it, my opinion on plastic surgery is that if someone thinks it will make them happier with themselves, then I say go for it, but don’t use it as a means to become a completely different person or to bandage deeper issues.

Readings for 10/18

One of the readings for this week was “Lean and Mean” in Enlightened Sexism. In this chapter the author discusses the pressures women and girls face to meet society’s standards of ideal beauty. She notes the explosion in cosmetic surgeries- most notably breast augmentation. Moreover, she describes how the standards of beauty are almost impossible considering women are expected to have tiny waists and yet watermelon size breasts. Only supermodels have these types of bodies but the overwhelming role of the media influences women and girls into extreme forms of dieting, practicing strange exercises, purchasing endless “miracle” beauty products, and even undergoing cosmetic surgery. One point I also found interesting was how women were also expected to binge eat. After a bad break up what do you do? Curl up with a pint of your favorite men- Ben and Jerry. This creates a double standard that wedges women between binging and starving. This reminds me of a previous clip I posted in my blog in which men acted like women. In one part of the scene the men discuss what they’ve eaten that day. One replies, “I shared a bagel…with a trashcan…” another says, “I had a big gust of wind” finally the last one admits, “I had three chocolate cheesecakes!” Clearly men’s interpretation of women is that they have out of control extreme eating habits, and unfortunately they may not be far off. Douglass writes how even girls in the third grade are unhappy with their bodies! She writes that it seems everyone has the mentality “to lose five more pounds.” The Mean section of this chapter comes from the theory that women participate in “hotness Olympics.” Girls are expected to put extreme effort into their appearances and suffer the consequences; those that forgo this hardship are to be ostracized and ridiculed. As demonstrated in movies like Mean Girls, girls compete against each other for the attention of boys- mainly by becoming “hotter” and ruining others’ reputations. Therefore, it becomes a self-enforcing process through which girls influence other girls’ appearances. The first process in destroying unattainable beauty standards may be to break this “girl on girl crime” as Tina Fay puts it in Mean Girls.
The other reading was an article about menstrual cycles, PMS, and menopause. This article was interesting because it explored a phenomenon not frequently seriously discussed. Many women will joke about PMS and quickly write off all of their problems onto just a case of PMS. In fact, Fausto-Sterling explains how woman have even come to expect such problems, and that expectation alone may be responsible for the appearance of some symptoms. I have never really considered PMS a serious illness myself, nor have I wondered as to how it seems to have a dramatically different effect on women. This article forced me to consider if PMS was actually a singular condition, given that it has such widespread and varied affects on the body. Few other diseases have such seemingly random effects on the body. Furthermore, PMS may only be considered a “disease” because it deviates from the social norm dictated by men. Women are considered to be slaves to their rollercoaster hormones, whereas men are assumed to be emotionally stable all the time and therefore objective judges about women’s changing behaviors. Why is that the case? Maybe women are the normally emotional ones and men are just emotionless robots. Maybe not. But either way, Fausto-Sterling raises an interesting point that men and women both typically experience an emotional cycle throughout the week. Furthermore, girls and boys have expectations about female behavior during the menstrual cycle and these expectations may then actually induce the anticipated behavior. There is a lack of well-crafted studies that examines the causes PMS. Studies either lack the double blind format, do not contain a placebo group, or the cohort is aware of the study’s purpose. All of these flawed methodologies lead to unreliable results. Menopause inhabits a similar mysterious place in society. Post-menopausal women are considered to be “castrated” and only slightly women because of their lack in estrogen. Stereotypically, post-menopausal women are helpless, wrinkled, depressed and susceptible to disease. However, a study of American and Japanese women revealed that 75% of menopausal women reported no sign of symptoms. Contradictory to common beliefs, postmenopausal women feel just fine. All in all, these readings exposed the standards to which women are expected to hold, positive or negative, and the problems they create.

Response to Yellow

Prior to doing these readings, I was aware of the rights that gay couples are denied of and why it is so important to fight to allow them to obtain those rights. But I was completely oblivious to the fact that the fight for gay marriage is largely geared to white upper class gay men and completely disregards the minority LGBQT’s fight for basic rights and acceptance. The reading that surprised me the most was Paula Ettlebrick’s “Since when is Marriage a Path to Liberation.” I was definitely a little turned off when I first started reading it. The article started off dismissing everything I had believed and fought for regarding gay marriage. I believed that gay marriage was the pinnacle of acceptance, and once that was achieved everything would be great and the issue would basically disappear. But as I continued to read, I realized that she was making some REALLY valid points. She clearly states that justice for gay men and lesbians can only be achieved when societal accepts and supports this group despite the relationship status across all cultural boards. Additionally she points out that even if gay marriage is approved, a percentage of this group will not reap the same benefits as the rest of it. She believes that acceptance and equality must be achieved before gay marriage is approved. I think she really has a good point that approving gay marriage might be getting ahead of the movement and ourselves. Though this article opened my eyes to the reality of approving gay marriage from the standpoint of a supporter of LGBTQs, I still believe that gay marriage should be approved because at least some major rights and equality will be then distributed.

Response to Imani

I agree with Imani that these reading were eye opening. For a long time I have heard about the disadvantages same sex couples face because they cannot legally marry but these articles introduced some new points I had never considered. There are many stories about loved ones that have lost everything because the state did not recognize their legitimate relationship. I can agree with everything that Naples says about gay marriage and parenting, especially the point she makes about gay couples continuing to have children despite societal resistance. Homosexual couples will continue to have children no matter what the law states, and I think that the law should just accept and recognize that for the children’s best interests. The article that most interested me was Ettelbrick’s article “Since When is Marriage A Path to Liberation.” It was astonishing to read a gay rights activist opposing legalizing gay marriage. I suppose I can understand her point that people should be opposing the institution of marriage altogether and the LGBTQ community can use their unique status as outsiders to voice a louder position, but this only makes sense in theory and, in my opinion, is ineffective in practice. If homosexual couples continue to marginalize themselves, no one in society will be willing to accept them either. Furthermore, by willingly rejecting the idea of marriage, same sex couples will only be denying themselves basic rights afforded to heterosexual couples. Their homes, bank accounts, and children will remain in jeopardy. I feel that homosexual couples can better fight for their rights once they are on an even playing field as the rest of heterosexual society. Homosexual couples may then decide to deny the institution of marriage, but they should at least have the option to decide one way or the other. Regardless of femenists or gay activists, every homosexual couple, like every heterosexual couple, should individually choose what path is the right one for them.

"Is Marriage the Path to Liberation?"

The readings for this week were really eye opening to me. They really gave insight into all the rights that gay and lesbian people are denied. The reading by Naples looked into same-sex parenting. This article focused on the political and personal aspects of same-sex marriages and parenting. I don't understand why politicians are trying to keep marriage strictly for heterosexual couples when it is such an institution that provides all types of protection and benefits that everyone despite who your partner is should have rights to. That also ties in with the same-sex FAQ's. I can't believe someone would ask why same-sex couples would even want to get married. In this country and in this society to be married is the highest level you are looked at differently and you are afforded advantages that unmarried people in this society do not have. Many of the benefits you don't even think of as a heterosexual person because you don't have to worry about them like Health insurance and Estate taxes. These things that we take for granted gay and lesbian couples have to worry about everyday. If marriage was purely the ceremony and the words that would be one thing but it's not. It is an institution that allows you to gain certain rights that others do not have and that is where the issues come in. I enjoyed Ettelbrick's article the best that we must change this whole institution of marriage because it add to the devide between "the haves and have-nots". I believe that the liberation of the Gay and Lesbian community is really tied to the Womens movement and essential for the overall liberation of both movements.

Response to Sara

The reading that I found most thought provoking was “Toward a Global History of Same- Sex Sexuality” by Leila Rupp. She forces the reader to reconsider the molds that have been created for sexual relationships, and even the definition of a sexual relationship. First she explores how in some cultures people participate in “sexual” acts as rites of passages and are not meant to be a part of a romantic relationship. Young boys perform fellatio, but only in order to swallow the semen of a man to become men themselves. Men and women have also been documented to have “friendships” with people of the same sex yet live otherwise heterosexual lives. It is difficult to pinpoint which relationship they would consider a true sexual relationship.
Furthermore, Rupp writes how in relationships there may be more important identifiers than genitals for determining the form of sexual interaction. She gives the example of a young girl explaining that she loves her dog she would marry it if she could, but it’s a female and she realized that wasn’t allowed. Her peer points out the fact that the reason she can’t marry the dog is because it’s a dog. This is an interesting point that I had never really considered. Genitals probably should not be considered the only factor for determining a type of relationship. With this form of categorization, many forms of relationships fall through the cracks. For example, what about intersex people? What about transgendered people? But more than just biological issues with the definition, factors such as age and class may also be more important. For example, child molesters homosexual or heterosexual are considered equally heinous. This article made me realize how limited our current catalog of sexual relationships really is. What is even considered a sexual act is a personal decision based on a variety including one’s culture. Furthermore, the priorities for determining what type of relationship one participates in should not be genitals alone. More important factors (bestiality?!) may be more important than the actual biological sex of the person.

Sexualities 10/07

The four different readings deal with societal norms and expectations of people, whether it’s someone’s sexual orientation, lifestyle, or body image. Society puts a great amount of pressure for people to fit into the mold of what is normal or acceptable. For those people don’t feel like they belong (and the majority don’t fit perfectly) life can be extremely difficult, as they can experience loneliness or feel like an outcast. The first reading, by Adrienne Rich, “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence,” she writes about the assumption of female heterosexuality, and the silencing of all other possibilities. She claims that male power demands that women maintain that role. She goes about defining characteristics of male power that subordinate women. These forms of power range from being recognizable to being very discrete. She also goes on to define different aspects of being a lesbian and the falsified notions society supports of why women are lesbians. Leila Rupp then writes about same-sex sexuality in her article, “Toward a Global History of Same-Sex Sexuality.” In the article she examines and tries to define the various relationship between men and women, men and men, and women and women. She believes the term same-sex sexuality goes beyond terms like “gay” or “lesbian.” In searching for a clearly idea of these relationships, she looks back in history and to various cultures around the world to try to come up with a concrete understanding. The relationship between women is especially difficult to define because it has not been well documented, and different cultures view types of relationships differently. It is important to take away from this article that not one mold or definition can be used to describe sexual interactions. Laurel Gilbert builds on these two articles in her own, “You’re Not the Type.” In this reading, she describes the difficulty in trying to fit her into one specific model. She is constantly told that she isn’t the type to have some of her defining characteristics. As a lesbian, feminist, and single mother she feels ostracized from mainstream society, especially from the norm set by her town. As she has grown up and become more comfortable in her own skin, she realizes that most people feel out of place and have various character “flaws.” Abra Fortune Chernik’s article, “The Body Politics,” approaches the notions a fitting into social norms from a different point of view. She discusses her struggle with anorexia and how she almost lost her life to try to make her body look the way she thought society expected her to look. After being hospitalized and extensive therapy, she now realizes that being skinny isn’t the key to happiness. She also realizes that the majority of women all struggle with some form of body image issue at some point in their lives, even if it is not obvious.

I really enjoyed how these readings shed light on the pressures to conform to society’s ideal type. When people don’t fit the mold they are afraid to be open about it and address the issue. As a result so many people feel lonely and out of place and at times must result to desperate measures to try to fit in or end their misery. I think the Rutgers student who killed himself after his homosexuality was exposed, is unfortunately a perfect example of what societal pressures can drive people to do.

Response to Sara's Post

This weeks reading were really enlightening. I enjoyed "Why Black Sexual Politics" and the readings from Listen Up the best. "Enlightened Sexism" also had some really good points I really liked such as well the title which pretty much says it all. When I told people i was reading a book and the chapter was "Sex R Us" I got really funny reactions. This "hypersexuality" that she speaks of in the media may be dangerous for kids and teenagers and have adverse effects. This reading also correlates really well with the stories in Listen Up. The story that I really liked was Rebecca Walker's "Lusting for freedom". This story gives you some insight into a world where sex and sexual experience can be empowering and not just about the sexual acts itself but growing and loving your body. She is really brave for telling us when she lost her virginity and how considering that is a touchy subject for most people. I really like this quote that she says in this story it states "Sex can look like love if you don't know what love looks like." I appreciate and understand this quote and I wish more young girls did and didn't search and seek love from a boy who just want sex from them. I also liked the idea that sex should be limited from just what is involved in it or something that should only be used in the realm of marriage and kids I think all young women should be able to explore their sexuality without fear of what society says about it. The other story by Sonia Shah about her sister trying to navigate two patriarchies one that gains approval and one that does not because of the culture she is from. I think this is interesting look at how international students and first-generation young people in the United States must navigate their sexuality in a realm that doesn't forget their culture. The ideas expressed in"Why Black Sexual Politics" were really interesting. To see the ideas of the glorification and associations with black women being animalistic and hypersexual can be seen in artists and video today. The way ideas in the past seem to perpetuate themselves in the present is crazy and if we don't stop this idea now it will continue in the future.

Readings for 10/5

The readings for this class focused entirely on women's sexuality and the various contexts into which it falls. Douglas in "Enlightened Sexism" writes about female sexuality as it is displayed in various medias including music videos, magazines, television series, etc. Collins focuses mainly on black sexuality and the ways in which taboo sexualities are portrayed in a white patriarchal society. She describes how black men and women are constantly seen as hypersexual and yet it is not discussed publicly. Instead, it is marveled at and absent from any helpful discussion within the community. She continues on to discuss how television shows like Maury, Montel, and Jerry Springer only fuel the fire by parading around uncommon forms of sexuality for amusement or ridicule and showing people that fit the mold for such stereotypes. The paternity tests that seem to be the only subject matter of these shows only serve to show black women as loose and irresponsible, while the black "baby daddies" are shown as deadbeat dads. I have somewhat of a problem with her argument here because on all the shows there are frequently white people with the similar problems. White women as well as white men are often times on the shows for similar reasons as their African American counterparts. Although the African American participants do cause the stereotype to persist, I feel that the presence of the Caucasian counterparts make this more of an argument for socioeconomic status and sexuality rather than race and sexuality. Rarely do you see middle class or upper middle class Americans on such shows.
The readings in "Listen Up" focused on individual personal stories about women's sexuality. In "Tight Jeans and Chianna Chorris" the author describes her sister's struggle to form her own sexual identity and reconcile her western sexuality with her indian sexuality. Her sister, who had initially pranced around in tight clothes, transformed into the Indian equivalent failed to trail blaze her own form of sexuality that incorporated them both. The reading I found the most interesting was "Lusting for Freedom." In this short story, the author describes (in my opinion) her extreme form of sexual liberation. She lost her virginity at age 11 and continued to date and sleep with many men throughout her life. The author describes sex as a step towards self actualization and a process that can truly be a form of communication or a display of trust between two people. She argues that sex should be de-contextualized from its societal stigmas and religious ties; it should be considered a unique process for each individual. I have found some major issues with her argument. First being that she describes the process as self actualizing, but previously states how she changed herself for each man. She took on a different identity that she thought would please them. She blatantly lied about who she was- that is not self actualization. Furthermore, I think completely removing sex from any stigmas- religious or societal- may be impossible. For many, sex is an integral part of their religion and our laws in society demand that certain practices be followed. I also don't condone her advertising young women to have sex. I don't believe that any 11 year old can truly handle the responsibility of sex. Many young women do not have the psychological maturity to handle sex and I feel rush in too quickly. Yes, some women may be more ready than others, but I think that decision cannot be made until at least puberty! I have known girls that were biologically ready for sex ( I know a girl that got her period in second grade) but absolutley not actually ready for it. I think her sexual experiences were unique and she was very lucky, the same may not be expected for all other women.

Response 10/5

I found it really interesting to look at the transition of increasing the acceptance of sexuality in society. When you really sit back and think about the shows and their content that were on television ten years ago in comparison to now, it is almost as if we are now watching soft-core porn television. It also seems like even the ratings for movies are more lenient. What qualified for an X rated film 10 years ago would now be considered R or even PG-13. Even magazines have transformed the messages they send readers. The ridiculous titles and articles Cosmo comes up with always amuse me. Its subject matter should definitely be read with a grain of salt. One time I sat down with a group of my guys and dissected its contents, and they thought it was the most absurd advice they had ever heard. The combination of this hyper-sexuality mixed with sub-par sexual education is lethal for teen audiences. While the media shows that sex and sexuality is the norm, schools and government are preaching for abstinence. Shows like MTV’s “Teen Mom” are even making teen pregnancy into a fad. All the attention on these moms gives off the message that it’s cool to get pregnant in high school, and if you do, maybe you’ll become famous. The relationship between the media and the people actually interacting with teenagers cannot lead to anything beneficial. I also really liked the reading about different culture’s interpretation of the increased sexuality in American society. I never really thought about that issue until reading that article. It is interesting to look at the way sexuality is expressed in different cultures around the world.

“News Flash:Internet to Blame for Suicide?”

Technology has advanced so far in the past ten years. It has become apart of all our daily lives. I don’t know anyone my age that doesn’t use the computer at least once a week. Technology can be a positive medium for our generation. I use the computer to reconnect with old friends, find out information, and watch videos of my favorite music artists. The problem with technology comes when people use it in negative ways. The Internet is an outlet that many people use to express themselves but that expression often gets used to harass and hurt people. This is where the negative and even dangerous part of technology comes in. The way in which people are abusing this technological medium needs to stop. The violation of privacy through this medium is a constant issue. The cyber-bullying and stalking and harassing through text can lead to very serious consequences that no one could have imagined.

This was the case with 18-year-old Tyler Clementi a freshman at Rutgers University. This was a horrible case of violation of rights and fearful backlash from people in this society that left a young man with a promising future dead. The circumstances surrounding this issue are not all that uncommon. Although we say that we are liberal and open to homosexuality many people are not and being homosexual in this society is still looked down upon and met with opposition and violence. This young man’s rights were violated when his roommate another student at the school streamed live video of him doing sexual acts with another man without his consent. Clementi had tried to tell an RA but from what I gathered not much was done about it and he ended up committing suicide. Clementi jumped to his death off the George Washington Bridge. His parents and many friends hadn’t known that he was homosexual and he didn’t want people to find out from this incident. I am really sad that this young man felt like there was no other way than to end his life.

In a society ruled by Patriarchy and heteronormativity people who deviate or seem to deviate from that are often treated cruelly and inhumane. The fact that there are messages that are sent to us through media, friends and family that reinforce this heteronormative mind state is a reason why homosexuality is not more widely accepted. The fact that at the essence we are all people regardless of sexual orientation is one that should unite us. Instead we let thing like gender and race and sexual orientation keep us divided. The outpour of situations surrounding homosexual people and the response that this issue is getting is fully warranted. If the suicides of theses teen boys can help people to understand that cyber bullying and treating someone like less than a person because of the way they choose to express them self sexually is wrong. There are many places and hotlines where teens can go before they get to the point where they feel they need to take their own life. There have also been many celebrities who have responded to this article and others incidents like this one. Ellen DeGeneres was really saddened by this story and spoke out about this and against teen bullying on her show. She used her celebrity to raise awareness about this issue and teach people that this has to end.
http://lafiga.firedoglake.com/2010/09/30/ellen-speaks-out-on-youth-suicides-and-bullying/

In this case media outlets were being used in a positive way to raise awareness and get people involved with what is becoming an epidemic among homosexual teens. One of the persons who committed suicide may have not actually been homosexual but because he appeared homosexual to his peers he was bullied just the same. The honest truth is what does someone whose gay looks like. There is no clear-cut answer because homosexual people don’t have a look but if you appear more feminine than your gender should then that is a way in which people think they can label you homosexual. Why is appearance so relied on when talking about homosexuality? The main reason is what we talked about in class Thursday, which are gender roles. We are so used to having two sexes male and female that we don’t know how to act if we are unsure what gender someone is. The societal cues that we get when we are growing up is how to talked to people based of gender that when we encounter someone is not clearly appears to be one of those we are uncomfortable and therefore react with anger and ignorance. If we take time to get to understand people we will see the people come in more than just the duality that society would lead us to believe that gender and sex roles must be reconstructed to include everyone. If there is a tolerance for religious beliefs in this country why not have tolerance for sexual orientation? People must put aside their religious beliefs when it come to sexual tolerance and realized that we are all people and whom we choose to love or be in a sexual relationship with has nothing to do with religion but with who we are as people. People come in various shapes, sizes, and you can add to the list sexual orientation. Being who you are does not effect who someone else is. When you are tolerant you do not have to necessary agree with another person choices but u tolerate it and do not retaliate.

The outcry of people talking about this case and the many other suicides and incidents these past few weeks surrounding sexual orientation are phenomenal. There is a lot of discussion going on pertaining to and concerning teen bullying and homosexuality. I think this is good that we have a whole online community contributing to discussion about Tyler and other young men who lost their lives so early do to the attitudes of people in this society. The things people are saying on twitter alone is remarkable the sheer awareness of our generation and the level of understanding that people are putting forth are amazing. The twitter community made #Clementi a trending topic and are asking questions like “Is this a case of when social networking goes too far?” Many people tweeted that the fact that this was done with technology and through social networks means makes it more painful. The sheer misuse of social networking sites to incite ignorance, bullying, and hate is just why many people fear that the internet will be the downfall of society. The offset of this is that so many people are using the internet for positive to shed light on these ignorant acts and combat the hate and cyber abuse with love and positivity.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/blog-post/2010/09/suicide_of_gay_teenagers_four.html

This story was a tragic one due to the circumstances surrounding it but if we can learn from this story and get some insight as to why Clementi and others fill like the only option is suicide. If we can try and understand what it must be like to not fit into the societal norms, we can create more programs and help lines so that these teens can get help before they feel like it is to late. We must try and stop this cycle because if we don’t people will continue to commit suicide and worst because they are not aware that there are people who are out there who know what they are going through and want to help them. Being homosexual or transsexual or intersexual is not a disease that guarantees a life full of pain it is a life that may come as a little bit more of a challenge because of this society and political structure in place but if we can continue to educate and not to eradicate people this can become something that adds to the diversity of humankind.

While Tyler Clementi’s death illustrates the dangers of the Internet the public response to his death represents the support and outreach to which the online community can help rectify these issues. The fact that someone is so fearful of public and private backlash if he or she “comes out the closet” so to speak that they would be willing to take their own life is so disheartening. The Internet was used as a vehicle in this incident to violate someone’s rights and the people responsible should be held accountable but who holds society accountable for making people feel that their only option is death. I think we all need to bear the brunt of that responsibility because everyday most of us are living in a would where we hear homophobic slurs and say nothing or even witness gay bashing and keep our mouths shut. We all need to speak up because if we don’t this will continue to happen in much more alarming numbers. We must deal with this head on and train people in dealing with homosexuality and all things that deviated from the norm because in the case of the bullying done at school the teachers and administration say nothing and by not speaking up we are perpetuating the problem. So we must speak because if we are not apart of the solution we are helping to continue the problem.

News Flash: When Social Norms Spin Out of Control

Throughout the semester we have read about gender norms. Women, as well as men, are expected to act a certain way according to predetermined societal norms. These norms are widespread and subtle; they affect what jobs people hold, how we communicate with one another and even what we wear. Such norms have been instituted for so long that most are followed without question and people assume there is no other way to live. Typically, norms are enforced only through fear of disapproval. Generally, people like to fit in and humiliation ensues when we assume we are in some way “wrong” for sticking out. The road taken is the “path of least resistance” (Johnson), which allows people to live the easiest and most comfortable way. Unfortunately, recently in Chechnya, such norms have started to be strictly enforced. Physical violence has developed against women that violate the new social norms of dressing. The traditionally patriarchal society has taken a turn for the worse and become increasingly radical; if something is not done to change the system of patriarchy soon, matters may only worsen.
Allan G. Johnson wrote about the system of patriarchy in his article “Patriarchy, The System: An It, Not a He, or a Them, or an Us.” Psychologists have studied the process of “socialization” intensely and Johnson describes it very well in his article. As a child, one was probably never taught that boys should not wear dresses. Instead, repeated observations were made and most likely unbeknownst to you, the lesson was ingrained into you. People learn from other people, the media, rules, and their culture how to behave. No singular person is responsible for this process and we all partake in willingly. The system is therefore created from individuals and yet the cyclical process takes on its own identity. Johnson explains, “It’s an arrangement of shared understandings and relationships that connect people to one another and something larger than themselves…Most important, we can describe it as a system without ever talking about the personal characteristics or motivations of the individual people who actually play it at any given moment,” (Johnson 5).
Johnson then elaborates on the mechanism that drives this system, known as following the path of least resistance. People generally will comply with the system because it offers the lifestyle with the least social friction. One can live their life smoothly without fear of consequences. “Most of the time, we make choices unconsciously without realizing what we’re doing. It’s just what seems most comfortable to us, most familiar and safest” (Johnson 4). This process known more generally as conformity occurs for various reasons and most usually out of fear of social rejection. A boy will not wear a dress because he will probably be ostracized from the population for breaking the norm. Women dress and act a certain way in order to conform to the dictating norms. They typically have longer hair, nails polished, and wear a stylish outfit. Most times people will do anything to follow these arbitrarily assigned rules of society and adapt themselves to fit the mold.
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/8010/Candid_Camera_proves_the_Sheeple_Theory_correct_/
This illustration demonstrates how people will look to others in order to model their behaviors and stay in sync with changing norms. Norms adapt over time as well as cultures and most people seamlessly adopt new norms. Over time, women have come to wear pants, adopt shorter hairstyles, and some even forgo shaving their body hair. Moreover, like previously stated, norms are typically instated without official rules. Women have never been told they absolutely must shave their legs under punishment of law. One’s choice in personal style is ultimately a personal decision. Changing styles are only a reflection of changing decisions.
But what happens when norms become policed? Such is policing has begun in Chechnya. According to older Chechen customs, women should dress conservatively; they typically wear headscarves and only clothes with sleeves. In the past, the men of the family have been responsible for monitoring the females’ dress codes. This should not be confused with the Middle East where such dress codes are written in the law; these fashion choices are simply social norms influenced by the Chechen culture. “Asma Jahangir, former United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, and her predecessor, Abdelfattah Amor, have both criticized rules that require the wearing of religious dress in public. Imposing Islamic dress on women is also inconsistent with Russia's constitution, which guarantees freedom of conscience,” (Human Rights Watch). Recently, Islamic extremists in the area have been enforcing stricter dress codes. Men outside of the family have begun to retaliate against women that are considered to be dressing inappropriately, some taking it so far as to pelt women with paintballs. Men that claim to represent the Islamic High Council have started to publicly campaign for more proper dressing using leaflets and television appearances to inform the public about changing expectations. Disturbingly, many government officials approve of this violence despite its illegality. Many times the men harassing the women are in fact government officials. Even the president of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, approves of such action, “Even if it was done with my permission I wouldn’t be ashamed. It turns out that the girls who were sprayed with paint had been warned several times previously. After such an incident, a girl should just disappear from the face of the earth, lock herself in the house and not go out because she behaved so inappropriately that such a thing happened to her,” (Kishkovsky). Several Human Rights organizations have begun to take notice and are fearful of human rights violations.
This can be understood as a patriarchal system that has spun out of control. Because men have normally been empowered over women, the men that are now starting to change their opinions for appropriate fashion are now changing the opinion of the entire Chechen population. It is a social norm issue because everyone seems to be complying and no one individual seems to be responsible. These rules have not been codified into law and there is no singular person that seems to be leading the extremist movement. Instead, the Chechen public opinion is starting to change and everyone is complying with such violent and unacceptable behavior. Perhaps, if the Chechen culture guaranteed equal rights to women this problem would never have arisen. If women were socially equivalent to men they may have been able to have a louder voice in their own fashion choices. Instead, the systematic patriarchal culture is now changing both the social norm of fashion as well as the more serious norm of appropriate ways to treat women. It is now acceptable in Chechnya for strange men to accost, harass, and assault women they deem improper. Furthermore, if the Chechen government is turning a blind eye (or even approving) of the extremist vigilantes their behaviors may only become more terrifying. Most people are simply taking the path of least resistance and following the new social orders to avoid any bodily harm. Instead, they should begin to stand against the current system and create their own. For the sake of women’s safety as well as to prevent future insurgency, men and women alike need to stand up against such behavior. Johnson writes, “To understand violence against women as both a social and psychological problem, we have to ask what kind of society would provide fertile ground for it to take root and flourish as a recurring pattern of behavior,” (12). Therefore, it can be understood that because the Chechen culture has been an overbearing patriarchy traditionally, the new more extreme versions have festered within the oppressive culture and overstepped their boundaries. Such systems need to be in check, and they may only be done by changing the patriarchal attitudes altogether. If patriarchal extremists are to be held accountable, all others involved in the less extreme patriarchal system must also be held accountable.
Such is the problem with unchecked social norms. They may appear harmless and trivial at first, but they can quickly spiral out of control. More importantly, it is more important to understand the greater social environment that fosters such norms; these Chechen practices are only admissible because the patriarchal culture has allowed them to be considered acceptable. If the Chechens are to protect their women from these extremists, they must also change their patriarchal system as a whole.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/world/europe/28iht-chechnya.html?_r=1&ref=women
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/08/24/russia-stop-forced-dress-code-women-chechnya
Works Cited:
Johnson, Allan G. "Patriarchy, the System: An It, Not a He, a Them, or an Us." 1-13. Print.

News Flash: Still Present Discrepancies at Work

Despite the best efforts of the various feminist movements, it is glaringly obvious that women still maintain a subservient role in the work force. In the present day, as minority groups are being granted greater equality, one half of the total global population is still being rendered inferior to their male counterparts. Studies show that in the United States, women have made little progress in narrowing the gender gap in the work force, over the past decade. A recent New York Times article titled, “Still a Slow Climb for Women in Management,” examines and tries to make sense of a report released by the Government Accountability Office. The report, based on data collected from the American Community Survey of the Census Bureau, clearly demonstrates that women have yet to achieve equality in the work place, especially in managerial positions. Although women faced obstacles in achieving equality before the market crashed, the current economic crisis has only made women’s inferiority worse for those trying to improve their ranks on the employment ladder. As the article, “Still a Slow Climb for Women in Management,” in the New York Times reports, there are still significant gender discrepancies in the work force, which marginalize women on the basis of their types of jobs and positions, pay, and a balance of work and home life.

One of the most blatant clues to the prevalence of gender discrimination is the difference in the types of jobs that men and women occupy and the positions they hold within those fields. There are certain career fields that employ more women than others. Careers in teaching, nursing, and secretarial work tend to be dominated by women. These types of careers also pay less than the careers dominated by men, such as finance, law, and medicine. The report examined thirteen job industries to measure the percentage of women holding management positions. In seven of the thirteen industries, women held a smaller percentage of the management positions, in comparison to their overall participation percentage in that field of work. In the three industries that women did have a higher share of management roles, which include: construction, public administration, and transportation, women tended to be under represented in that field overall (Rampell). It seems as if the types of work that employ women have less room for upward mobility, or fewer higher position or management jobs, in general. It could also be argued that the majority of the sectors that did have higher percentages of women in management positions are the sectors that require more physical labor or are labeled by society as jobs that only men can perform (i.e. construction workers, electricians, or plumbers). Thus, in order to avoid the question of sexism, employers hire women to become managers or just sit behind a desk, instead of being out in the field with their male counterparts. As for the higher percent of female managers represented in the public administration sector, it could be argued that as a government entity, this sector has to uphold a higher standard of equal opportunity employment to convince the public that the government is doing its part to promote gender equality. Ellen Neuborne writes about discrimination in the types of work women are asked to carry out in he article, “Imagine my Surprise.” At her first newspaper job, Neuborne was asked to cover a story about a local fundraiser for a natural disaster. She had followed the story from the beginning, and when she was about to travel to the location of the disaster, she was taken off the case and was replaced by a male colleague. She was told that the long drive would be too strenuous for her. Neuborne comments on her boss’ blatant act of sexism, “He seemed, in voice and manner, to be concerned about me. It worked. A man got the big story. And I got to stay home. It was a classic example of a woman being kept out of a plum project ‘for her own good’” (Listen Up, 184). Neuborne’s experience and the New York Times’ article demonstrate that women constantly face employment discrimination.

The types of jobs that women occupy and the positions they hold greatly influence the rate of their earnings. The disparity in earnings shows that equal work does not necessarily mean equal pay. However, it should be noted that progress has been made to narrow this gap. The report showed that in 2009, full-time employed women earned 80.2 cents for every dollar men made, as opposed to 62.3 cents to every dollar in 1979 (Rampell). While an 18 cents increase may seem significant, the thirty-year time frame of this transition is less than impressive. In the past thirty years, so much has happened in regards to the procurement of rights and equality for other disenfranchised groups that a gain of less than twenty percent in female earnings hardly seems progressive. It should also be taken into consideration that the twenty percent increase has not been distributed evenly across all groups of women. In terms of types of employment, for instance, the report found that across all of the thirteen industries the gender gap in managers’ pay shrunk only slightly. In 2007, on average, full-time female managers earned 81cents per dollar of their male counterpart’s earnings, as opposed to 79 cents in 2000. Looking at specific fields, the gap was the narrowest in public administration (women earned 87 cents for every dollar earned by men), and the widest gap was in construction and financial services (79 cents to every dollar) (Rampell). As aforementioned, the smaller discrepancy in public administration makes sense given governmental accountability and public transparency in this sector. Furthermore, it is not surprising that the construction and finance sectors have the widest gap because of society’s connotations and stereotypes about women working in those sectors. Overall, the fact remains that women have yet to be fully acknowledged for their contributions to the work force, as evident by the current wage gaps.

The article really highlighted the difficulty for women to try to balance work with their home life, based on statistics from the report. The article seems to imply that women cannot have both worlds, and are forced to eventually choose between one and the other. The study showed that managers who had children experienced a wider pay gap. Since 2000, managers who are mothers earned 79 cents to every dollar earned by managers who are fathers. The article suggests that this discrepancy influences the statics that female managers are less likely to have children than male managers. In 2007, the report found that 63 percent of female managers did not have children in comparison to the 57 percent of male managers who did not have children. Additionally, female mangers were less likely to be married (59 percent) compared to 74 percent of married male managers. The report also found that on average, women in management positions were less educated, younger, and more likely to only work part-time than their male colleagues (Rampell). These statics allude to the fact that women in the workforce feel the pressure to choose between work and family more so than men do. When examining some of the aforementioned statistics, it is easy to draw the conclusion that women who do choose to start families are gradually pushed back into the home and find it very difficult to return back to work. Betty Friedan wrote in The Feminine Mystique about the feelings unfulfilled housewives had in the years following World War II, and how those women who had goals of becoming more than just housewives and having careers were looked down upon. Friedan states, “For the oldest of these women, these daughters of the American middle class, no other dream was possible. The ones in their forties and fifties who once had other dreams gave them up and threw themselves joyously into life as housewives,” and she goes on to ask, “are the women who finished college, the women who once had dreams beyond housewifery, the ones who suffer the most?” (Feminism in our Time, 62). Friedan’s writing can be used to help make sense of the confliction modern day working women feel over their careers. It seems as if a combination of factors play into the report’s statistics. Are women initially discriminated against because of their potential to get pregnant and leave the work force “prematurely?” Do women once again face discrimination when trying to reenter the work force because of their age? It is also important to consider factors other than forms of discrimination to explain women’s positions and subordination in the various fields of work. Do working mothers just not have the time to work full-time? There also seems to be a sense of fear among working women with powerful positions that all of their hard work that got them to where they are will be for nothing once they get married, start a family, and risk not being able to return to work or reclaim the level of power they once had. It is unfortunate that even in the modern era, women are still facing similar issues as described by Betty Friedan in the 1960s in trying to strike a balance between work and family.

The New York Times article, “Still a Slow Climb for Women in Management,” proves that gender discrimination is still very prominent in the work force. The types of jobs and positions women can occupy remain limited and segregated. Working women are also the victims of wage discrepancies. Furthermore, employed women are often forced to choose between their careers and home life. The results of this Census report go to show that a feminist movement is still necessary to procure the future rights of women in the work force.