Main Post for 11/30

These readings this week were really interesting but not surprising. The first reading in Cynthia Enloe's The Curious Feminist was Men in Militias, Women as Victims was about the how men are militarized to become aggressive and end up being perpetrators of rape and other crimes. She talks about a man named Borislav and how he was not a dangerous man but was on trial for murder and mass rape. The fact and how something like ethnicity can lead to killing and raping people is a problem in many nations. I think that because even now the military is so structured for men and not women that the armies have so many issues concerning gender and well as sexuality. "Buried in the story of the once unexceptional person are important puzzles - and political revelations- about how ethnicity gets converted into nationalist consciousness, how consciousness becomes organized, and how organized nationalism becomes militarized. None of the transformations are automatic. Nor is their sequence from one to the next. Each call for explanation. But exploring these questions, melting down the analytical iceberg, requires taking a close look at gender." The fact that boys are socialized for military in some way is an extremely important thing to look at. The draft that is enlisted in many countries at times of war look at men to draft into the homogeneous all male militias. The women who have been raped are not victims but victors to have survived and they will make sense of what has happened to them post war and rebuild their communities. In the "Spoils of War" it talks about the US soldiers being able to buy prostitutes in Japan instead of raping women but as we have seen in documentary's like "Very Young Girls" prostitution is not a lifestyle or luxury for most women. It is their only option and the fact that the soldiers being able to buy prostitutes as a result of raping a young girl is not okay they men need to find other ways to deal with themselves. This encourages prostitution and sex trade worldwide and the fact that this is a US military policy makes me feel really ashamed of my country. Women getting raped in the military is not uncommon but commonplace. One particular story my grandmother had me read in a newspaper was about this woman LaVerne Johnson who was raped and burned to death that the military covered up and made it like a suicide. This really stayed with me and i realized that the military has too much power when they can just cover up a murder and not be put on trial or even investigate. Many times women are raped by their fellow soldiers but it is not something that they put to the forefront we need to have better protection for our female soldiers across the globe.

http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/01/26/13rd-of-women-in-us-military-raped/

http://www.truth-out.org/article/military-hides-cause-women-soldiers-deaths

http://www.socialistaction.org/love1.htm

Response for 11/30

I was greatly surprised by these readings to learn about the frequency of crimes against women in the military. The women are serving alongside men as comrades fighting for the same purpose and it is upsetting that they would be so disrespected and abused.  In the military you are trained and expected to trust your fellow soldiers; it is worrisome that this belief does not apply to the relationship between female and male soldiers. I do not mean to say that all male soldiers are a terror to female soldiers, but it is alarming  how much more frequent such crimes are than in civilian society. I think this relates back to the social norms we discussed previously about patriarchal society as a whole. Being a soldier obviously changes a person, and being isolated from society can only further add to the differences in behavior. The violence that soldiers are constantly being bombarded with is a striking difference between the military and civilian society. Such a violent environment is obviously conducive to violent behavior, and it is understandable that some of that violence may be misdirected. The emphasis on masculinity and strength is clearly manifested in these attacks and it is upsetting that such violent exertions of masculinity are directed at women comrades.  The military should and must take precautions to prevent conditions for worsening. How can we expect our soldiers to protect us if we cannot protect them?

Response for 11/30

After completely these readings, I couldn't help but feel as though the men in described in these readings couldn't help their sexual, aggressive, or abusive desires and that by default women were victims of their lack of self-control. In the New York Times articles about female soldiers in Iraq, it is awesome that so many women are now joining the military, but I find it troubling that it seems as if they are still not being treated equally to their male counter parts. It is unfortunate that they are being subjected to sexual harassment or worse, rape, while in this very confined and isolated area of their army base. Furthermore, it is frightening that many of these affected women feel as if they cannot report abusive for fear of not being believed or receiving an dishonorable discharge. It is a very legitimate fear to have that a higher ranking officer who was the perpetrator would be believed over a woman in a lesser position. I also couldn't help but thinking of "Don't ask Don't tell" when reading these articles. A lot of the arguments behind this law is to prevent "distractions" and camaraderie on military bases. But from what is seems like all this sex is happening and no one is being "distracted." Additionally, it also seems like allowing for the sexual abusive of female soldiers would taint some of the camaraderie. It was also stated that there is some occurrence of rapes among males, but is rarely reported for fear of one's sexuality being questioned. But it is because of this law that men who are raped are afraid to report it, further leading to a degree of discomfort on these military bases. These same ideals can be applied to the readings in the Curious Feminist. Both articles somewhat depict militarily involved men (whether Serb or American) as being unable to repress their sexual and aggressive desires, and therefore take it out on local women. What does this say about our faith in our military??

Response for 11/23

All three of these readings focuses on different types of violence. The victims of these types of violence are not always women, but the majority of the time they are. It was really interesting reading "Supremacy Crimes," which talked about serial killers. There seems to be a trend that a majority of serial killers are white males, usually intelligent, middle class, and heterosexual. It seems as if the intentions of their crimes are to demonstrate their superiority against not only women, but also those who the view as weaker and lesser than themselves. The one problem I had with this article was when the author seemed to justify crimes committed by people who do not classify by the aforementioned characteristics. It just appeared that the author was trying to say that these types of killers were more justified in their actions because they were trying to improve their own conditions. In my eyes murder is murder, anyway you look at it regards of a person's class, gender, or intelligence level.

Then in the "Letter to My Students," it talked about the steps that students should take to prevent rape or deal with it. This article reminded me a lot of the atmosphere on campus last year. It seemed like Colgate's students have a similar experience to the student body at Wesleyan. After reading these tips, I realized that I already knew the majority of them based on the information we learned during the training provided as a result of the Campus Climate Survey. I guess it just goes to show that the information session was semi successful even if some of the people in the audience took it as joke.

The third piece that we read talked about the silencing of women and how it could be seen as a type of violence against women. To me, the article seemed a little outdated. It seems like in today's society, women have a lot more access to voice their opinions. Women are not looked down upon for speaking up like they used to. The one thing in particular, that was mentioned in the piece, that still needs greater attention is probably about sexual harassment against women. It seems like rape and sexual violence still remains a very taboo topic of discussion. It is essential that not only women, but also men work together to make this a more prominent topic of discussion to see what can be done to prevent it.

Response to Sara 11/18

I thought this weeks reading nicely tied together our class’s discussion about the various issues facing the feminist movement. Particularly the article “Mapping the Margins” explored the pratfalls with creating a united feminist front against a patriarchal system.  I had never really considered a giant movement for a cause problematic until reading this article. I understand the author is not advocating fractioning the feminist movement, but she does note that we need to understand the homogeneity of the feminist movement is a myth.

            Creating a united front for a cause of course has its benefits- the problems of a huge group of women are much harder to ignore than the isolated reported incidents of a few. A cohesive group can also gather and allocate resources better than a smaller scattered group. Overall, the unified feminist movement captures more attention than smaller women’s groups and can elicit more change from society. Nonetheless, the change elicited may only benefit a select few within the movement. Intersecting cultural practices may have effects on the results of the movement. Crenshaw explains how the benefits gained by the feminist movement affect women of color differently than it does white women. Many times women of color fall between the cracks of the movement and they require extra benefits to manage the system. For example, immigrant women may be especially hesitant to report domestic violence because of their legal standing. Reporting violence would require knowledge of the law and police system; furthermore, these women frequently depend on their husbands for all of their knowledge and such husbands may be supplying them with false information. I was also surprised to learn how some states are withholding information about domestic violence among people of color for fear of how it portrays the community. I agree that it is never a good idea to give out skewed information, but at the same time if reported objectively, this information is necessary to share. Such information would be valuable to teach others about the problems within such communities and would probably rally people for change. Overall, I thought this reading was especially valuable because it explains how broad sweeping changes for a large movement may not have all of the benefits most people assume. There are indeed problems associated with large groups and appeasing every particular person in such a group may be impossible. However, it is important not to forget the specific needs of most members and try to address any issues to the best of one’s ability. 

Response to Sara

This weeks readings made me really think about women and how all over the globe women are being silenced. I didn't really dwell on why issues that faced women were not really at the forefront of many political agendas but to realize they are not on any agenda not even nationally was really eye opening. The other reading about Supremacy Crimes ties into the ideas of rape and sexual violence because these issues are all about dominance and especially male dominance. In "Whom do we Take Seriously" Enloe talks about full scale rape as a tactic of war and domestic violence and why that is not on the list as important international codes of human rights. These issues cross all boundaries because so many people are affected by them. Crimes against women are not trivial but important because they are tied in to the very fabric of society. The Steinem article addresses the fact that white heterosexual males of higher economic status are often the ones killing and murdering but no one is reveiling what the underlying issue is. As Steinem suggests we need to change the way we are nurturing boys and let them know that expressing emotion is not feminine but apart of life and allows you to be a whole person and not just this narrow view of what a man should be. I went to a speaker this week that talked about this very notion and getting away from this stereotype "man" and allowing men to know that expressing emotion such as sadness is okay because often it is better than the anger that comes through when men turn there emotion inward.

https://mail.google.com/a/students.colgate.edu/?ui=2&ik=157325495a&view=att&th=12c389ab186c7358&attid=0.1&disp=inline&realattid=f_ggcz6csk0&zw

Follow Up Response: 11/18

The topic of sexual violence and rape is such a sensitive topic that it rarely gets the attention that it should. Perhaps if more people were willing to talk about it, then the number of victims could be reduced. Though disturbing, I think that these readings do a good job approaching the subject and the reality of it. The reading “Don’t call me a Survivor,” was by far the most difficult to stomach. The author makes rape a reality and her story is very relatable. To think that she was raped, not once, but three times is horrifying. What I found most troubling that she had no one to turn to seek comfort or confide in. Every time she did try to talk to someone, whether her parents, friends, or the authorities, there were negative repercussions. She was made to think that it was her fault that she was raped and being raped was what it meant to be a woman. It is hard not to question what is was about her that made her a target of rape three times. Additionally, I found myself wondering if after the first time she was raped, that if she had received the proper help and counseling that the other two times could have be prevented. Then again, it seems like the gang rape was an inescapable situation. It is especially important to bring into consideration what the article in Feminism in our Time says about the typical rapist. Before reading this, my idea of a rapist was someone with a mental disability or some neurosis. Instead, we learn that the majority of rapists are typically normal men that are prone to violence. I really made me wonder who in my daily life could be capable of committing such an atrocity.

In a recent Private Practice episode, one of the doctors, Charlotte, is beaten up and raped while on call. Of course they portray her attacker as a mentally deranged man, who was out for revenge against women. This doctor is a particularly strong and proud woman; she is even the Chief of the hospital. In order to “maintain her dignity” she refuses to admit that she was raped, for the fear of people treating her differently as a weak victim. I think this episode plays nicely into these readings, especially “Don’t call me a Survivor,” because it shows how traumatic sexual assault is and the psychological damage it does to the victims. It is even more unfortunate that some woman become so paralyzed by it and the stigmas attached to it that they refuse to take action and do something to stand up for themselves. For this reason, it is imperative that the issue of sexual violence and rape becomes a more talked about topic and that greater action is taken to prevent other women from becoming victims.

Response for 11/11

The reading “The Score; How Childbirth Went Industrial” by Atul Gawande explains the rise of Cesarean sections within obstetric practices and the industrialization of childbirth. Historically, childbirth has been extremely risky for both the infant as well as the mother. Gawande writes how at any point within the process, something can go wrong causing injury or death to the mother or the baby: “For thousands of years, childbirth was the most common cause of death for young women and infants.” Obstetricians had created complicated procedures to deal with each possible scenario. If the baby was stuck one way, you turned the arms like this, if stuck another way you rearranged the shoulders like that, etc.  There was also a huge lack of communication within the practice. The forceps, which had solved a great deal of issues, was kept a secret within the field. Only relatively recently was the secret exposed. As time continued, less people were using midwives and more were going to the actual hospital. Nonetheless, the midwives boasted better results. Less women and children died with midwives. To adjust their results, hospital obstetricians instated new regulations and deaths decreased. One anesthesiologist created a scale for infant’s health that allowed doctors to quantitatively measure the appearance and health of a baby. If below a certain score the baby probably would not survive, if above there was still hope.  Today, 30% of women are receiving cesarean sections. Goer wrote a deconstruction piece tearing apart Gawande’s piece. She is concerned about how nonchalantly Gawande explains C sections and includes several troubling statistics about the dangers one risks in the process.             One point she makes is that C sections are considered interventions and should therefore not be considered routine. They are only meant to be involved in worst case scensarios- the 30% rate for women is unnecessarily high.

           

Main Post to Readings for 11/11

The reading for today were really interesting to me. I didn't know any of the statistics about cesarean section versus natural births or any of the history. This move away from natural births and mid-wives makes me a little nervous for my cousin who wants to be a midwife. If this is a job that is becoming obsolete how can she make a living? This advancement that technology has made in the obstetrician occupation has made cesarean section more widely known. Popularity for c-section births have been increasing. The scheduled c-section is preferred by many women now. I have watched different baby birthing stories on TLC and many of the women on those shows used cesarean and it tells you that there are not many risks and the scar is really small and it is a relatively safe surgery. I have even myself told people that c-section is a not a dangerous procedure and that it is a lot more safer than you think. I have this impression because this is the rhetoric that has been used around c-section. The fact that doctors and hospitals have made births systematic makes be think that it is losing it's sentimental value. The reason that people are lead to believe that c-section's are really much easier than vaginal births is really just about economics. Doctors get paid more for c-section's so now much more women are opting for scheduled c-sections by the recommendation of their doctor. The truth is that the doctor's just want more money. This is just like in Orgasm Inc. and what going on with vaginal surgery if women are led to believe that this is not a major risk surgery they will opt to choose it over the danger of vaginal birth. The doctor doesn't tell you that he gets paid more for a vaginal birth than a cesarean you are just supposed to believe that he has yours and your baby's best interests at heart. This also brings up a point made in the article that the baby's health may be put before the mother's and that if the baby survives than that is a success upon the doctor but nobody sees how the mother copes after the child is born. They don't do studies of moms who develop PPD and does having a cesarean affect them. I think that obstetrics becoming systemic has it's positive aspects as well as it's downfalls. Natural births are still a wonderful choice and i think surgery should only be considered if it is absolutely necessary. The midwives had the right idea and delivered more babies in the past that obstetricians and i think they should have been consulted when changing the process instead of making everything systemic. They have known how to deliver babies for years and I think that they still are the most knowledgeable people in this area.

Follow Up Response for Readings 11/11

Until reading these articles, I wasn't really aware that giving birth still could be so dangerous. I mean I knew that back in the 1800's a lot women died in childbirth. But it is really scary that it can still pose such a threat, though not nearly as much as it used to. Also after the readings I am still confused over the debate on C-sections. While the first author presented a valid argument that C-sections are potentially less dangerous than natural childbirth, the second author clearly opposes them. In my opinion I think surgery should only be used as a last resort. No surgery has a 100 percent guarantee and the baby and mother can also be easily be harmed in during a C-section. I also think that there is something really special to be said about natural childbirth. I think it is amazing that women have been successfully giving birth naturally for thousands of years, and medical intervention is a fairly recent phenomenon. These articles also to brought to mind that while countries like the United States and other developed countries have been able to improve the mortality rate of childbirth, developing countries still struggle with this. In a sense a large percentage of the world is still stuck with childbirthing practices of hundreds of years ago. I think it should be a main priority of the developed countries to educate these countries about this modern medicine and practices for childbirth.

Response for 11/9

I find the subject of abortion particularly interesting because it is something that I feel women my age more frequently encounter. Although I have not, thankfully, had to make the decision weather to abort a pregnancy, I’ve known girls that have. I think most girls know of someone that has had an abortion, has been rumored to have had an abortion, or stayed pregnant. It is a controversial topic and one that certainly sparks conversation. Most sexually active women consider abortion; it is usually believed to be the worst-case scenario and one that many people seriously stress about. I’m not sure if being pregnant or aborting the baby would worry me more; I think the decision would be the most trying part of the whole ordeal. I would always wonder what would have happened had I made the other decision. I cannot even imagine being in that situation and seriously sympathize with those that have made such a serious decision. I found the “Vacuum Cleaners, Abortion, and the Power Within” reading the most interesting because I think it offered a unique perspective about abortion. Strangely, the author was pro-life but had three abortions previously.  Also interesting is that the author acknowledges the advancements feminists have made to even earn the right for abortions, “I thank the people who bent over backwards so that I can have the luxury of experiencing the beliefs that I know hold” (117). I think the author makes a great point by saying that abortion should not divide feminists. The controversy is one that only serves to divide the feminist cause and distracts women from the flaws within our patriarchal system. I also think her point about organic abortions was brilliant. I think one reason that abortions are so abhorrently protested against is because the procedures are so public and grotesque. Having to walk to a clinic in order to have a fetus sucked out of your body is disgusting and humiliating. I feel that if women had more private ways to deal with unwanted pregnancies, abortion may not divide our country as much. Women could make their own decisions without having to advertise it to the rest of their communities. Furthermore, protestors could not interrupt a private moment within someone’s life.  Overall, I think abortions should be decided for or against on an individual basis within the privacy of one’s home. The decision is monumental for women and also potentially upsetting to many people; if left in the privacy of one’s home I think women could reunite and focus on more pressing matters in society.

Follow Up Response to readings for 11/09

I thought this weeks readings were really interesting in their approach to the subject of abortion. Having never faced the decision of having an abortion, I have never really thought about the emotional struggles over having an abortion. Despite this emotional disconnect, I have always been pro-choice, and have often wondered why anyone, especially young women, would even question keeping the baby if they have the means to abort it (to me pregnancy at a young age seemed like a life sentence). After doing the readings, I felt as if I had a greater acceptance and was more understanding of the choices women choose to make. The article, “Abortion, Vacuum Cleaners and Power Within” I found it a little disturbing as it vividly described the process of an abortion. Additionally, I found some of claims farfetched and also became frustrated with her lack of sexual responsibility, which put her in the situation of having to weigh her options three times. I really liked the article, “And so I Chose.” I enjoyed how she didn’t try to ram her opinion on the issue of abortion down her audience’s throat, and instead focused on educating the public so that they would be able to make the best judgment for themselves. Her article really exemplifies what it means to be pro-choice. I think a lot of people automatically assume that someone who is pro-choice would automatically choose to have an abortion. But what this article clearly demonstrates is that pro-choice really just means keeping your options open and being able to make a decision which is right for one’s on situation. I think this article helped me to re-align my pro-choice ideology to realize that even when I think an abortion is the right solution, for some it might not be, and that we all have to the live with the consequences of our actions.

"News Flash #: Homosocial Regime"

Wednesday night on October 13^th pledges from the fraternity DKE (Delta Kappa Epsilon) were seen and heard shouting obscene chants like “No means Yes and Yes means Anal” among other things. They shouted this outside the Yale Women’s Center and young women’s dorms. This incident can be seen in many different ways. At surface level I think people would say that this was just a prank apart of the hazing process for these pledges and that it is all in good fun. The trouble comes with the words they were shouting and where they were saying these things. This was not just example of misogyny but a real attack on sex culture in this country and rape as a practice to “keep women in their place”. The article in the Ms. magazine blog gave a really interesting analysis of this incident that I didn’t initially think of when I heard about this issue. The author Michael Kimmel gave historical background about fraternities Yale and similar issues so that we can see that this is deeper than just a stupid frat prank. He attributes this to a need of these boys “to re-establish a sexual landscape which they feel has been thrown terribly off its axis”. The status of DKE on Colgate’s campus in light of this incident at Yale has also been a discussion point. The dismemberment of DKE on this campus was allegedly due to unethical hazing practices such as having to rape women to get into the fraternity. I think this speaks right to our class discussion about the group mentality. Within the homosocial identity of these frats they must devalue all things not “male” and they do that by using sex and sexuality. Most of these men in frats would not do half of what they do if they were by themselves. Sometimes when you’re a part of a group your individual morals are thrown out to become part of this bigger social collection. When you are in a fraternity especially on this campus you gain popularity and you have “pull” that you would not otherwise have without that frat. You are not just an individual anymore but you become the fraternity.

The problem with fraternities is that they allow for this homogeneous space where “boys can be boys” without the disturbance women. This is just like the concept of the “He-Man Woman Haters Club” in The Little Rascals. This homogenous club further perpetuates the idea that there are only 2 sexes and the dominant of the two are male. Historically in this country men have always been the one to have access to these public spheres and institutions which have allowed them to be in the company of one another without the presence or input of women. When women began to gain rights in the 19^th century there was an outcry from men who felt that the dynamics of this country would change if women were allowed to be in the public sphere. They felt as though their club was being forced to become integrated with people who did not belong there. This idea that men have the inherent right to certain arenas like education is fueled by the idea that the exclusion of women in the public sphere is the way to achieve a great society. Men had been taking care of this country and maintaining the status quo since this country’s inception so they had no need for women other than for sex and reproducing. When women began getting rights to all of these public arenas men became scared and insecure. They were afraid that the status quo would be turned on it head and they would no longer be the dominant sex. As a result men came to use women more as a tool and trophy for their success and a marker for how cool they could be. By making women a quantifiable object there would never be a need to take them seriously and the status quo would remain.

When men began using women as markers of their “masculinity” that is when “the club” saw it as a tool to exploit women and therefore raise men. Women being seen as sexual objects are not a new concept. The idea of using women as sexual conquests to elevate the male ego is a rather newer concept. This is a western idea that if you are a male and you have multiple sexual encounters with multiple females then you are “the man” allows for men to assume social hierarchy. This double standard praises men and criticizes women. Within frats you will find that this is the common idea. Many of the frat brothers will act on this ideal in hope for acceptance and praise from the group. This in turn perpetuates itself as the dominant ideology within a frat. The women who participate in these activities don’t see what goes on in frats and think that they are just following social norms but actually they are also helping to perpetuate this ideology. When frat culture is the dominant culture on college campus’ and they control the social scene the fraternity ideas then become dominant ideas for the campus as a whole. This is what I feel has happened with Colgate. The hook-up culture’s link to frat culture on this campus is not a coincidence. People who don’t have these ideologies when they come to Colgate leave with them. When they join a frat they adopt that frat’s ideology and the “sexual conquests” is a key ideology.

This ideology is crucial pertaining to the dynamics of men and women on these college campuses like Yale and Colgate both originally all male campuses. The relationships are played out partly through sororities and fraternities. As we talked about in class there are different rules for sororities than there are for fraternities. Sororities aren’t allowed to have parties with liquor. These differences allow for there to be an overwhelming frat culture on these campuses because the sororities are not allowed to offset the influence of the more popular frats. I think in order to work on these differences we need to recognize that although women and men are different we need to hold everyone to the same standards or else we are adding to this divide and perhaps allowing men in these frats to perpetuate the idea of male superiority and thereby of female inferiority.

The inferiority of women to men is looked at when you look at rape. Rape is not an act of sex or of love but of dominance. It is often a man exerting his dominance over a woman by forcing her to do something of a sexual nature. This is an issue that many woman struggle with and that many men will never know. The courage and strength of people who have been raped to get help and share their stories is amazing. For men to make a joke of rape is not funny. The topic of rape is not funny because no one is free from the threat of rape and it can happen to anyone but because it is more likely to happen to women men feel they can joke about it. The slogan “No Means No” was said in many sexual assault and anti-rape rallies for women to let them know that if they say no than they are to be listened to and respected. When the pledges at Yale shouted No means Yes they completely negated women’s voices and basically said that whatever women say you should do the opposite. As Michael Kimmel said in the article the second part of the chant “Yes mean Anal” says something about sex in this country. “This chant assumes that anal sex is not pleasurable for women; that if she says yes to intercourse, you have to go further to an activity that you experience as degrading to her, dominating to her, not pleasurable to her.” The breakdown of the chant is really interesting because in it reveals the idea that men still are on top and women still are on the bottom of the social ladder and if that is not apparent than we can degrade you(women) until you get the point. The pledges were doing this in a group setting which feed into that group mentality. I am sure that mostly all of the men who were shouting the chant did not actually believe what they were saying but none decided to speak up and not do it they just went along with it because the prestige and popularity from being in the fraternity is worth people thinking that they as individuals are sexist.

Once you lose the protection of the group you become vulnerable and subject to being ridiculed for being an individual but in the group you can just blend. The frat provides that buffer where anything you say can be attributed to the frat and not your individual opinion. The frat in a way makes you shed who you are in replacement for the person you could be with that frat and if it includes becoming sexist then many men will just make that sacrifice. That is a sad fact for men in frats and puts the frat experience into perspective for me.

News Flash: When Makeovers Go Too Far

Article

It’s not difficult to find a beauty ad. In fact, they are usually hard to avoid. Virtually every form of the media batters into people how we are supposed to look and what to do to achieve such physical perfection. Women in particular are held to ludicrous standards that are especially hard to achieve if you wish to maintain a healthy balanced lifestyle. Unless you have abundant time and money you may never look like Angelina Jolie, Gisele Bundchen, or Marissa Miller and yet we are all compared to models like them multiple times a day. With improving technology, women are going to greater extremes to become gain a stereotypically beautiful physique. In the past some television shows have highlighted these disturbing trends. Thankfully shows like the Swan and Extreme Makeover were short-lived after cries of disgust from certain audiences. It would appear however, that the E! network has not learned from such mistakes. A new show called, “Bridal Plasty” about future brides competing for cosmetic surgery is set to premiere this fall. This show is a reflection of our societal obsession with beauty; it reinforces the belief that women’s bodies are somehow inherently flawed and to be happy, women must change their physical appearance to achieve stereotypical perfection.

On the show, contestants compete in wedding themed games for the chance to win a surgical procedure. The last woman remaining after eliminations each week will win the rest of her desired procedures and her dream wedding. In a dramatic twist, the bride is not scheduled to reveal her new body until the day of her wedding. This show mirrors the belief in our society that women’s bodies are imperfect and need to be corrected for happiness. Because physical perfection is understood to represent complete perfection, women are going to ever more dangerous extremes in their beauty regimes. Pressures are causing younger women to start beauty regimes earlier, investing more time and money into the process. The beauty industry revolves around this notion and capitalizes on insecurity to profit. “Reared on reality TV and celebrity makeovers, girls as young as Marleigh [2 years old] are using beauty products earlier, spending more and still feeling worse about themselves.” Equating emotional or social characteristics with physical features creates dangerous mandates for women to correct their bodies. Women must remind themselves that the media and beauty industries are ultimately out to make money; they are corporations and therefore their bottom line is the profit margin. “According to a NEWSWEEK examination of the most common beauty trends, by the time your 10-year-old is 50, she'll have spent nearly $300,000 on just her hair and face.”

Beyond wasting money to meet these standards, women are also depleting their self-esteem. By comparing oneself incessantly to models, women and girls lose their sense of worth and become emotionally desperate for improvement. The number one cosmetic procedure is now breast implants. The procedure is serious and poses a number of health hazards- it is also completely unnecessary. The new growing trend depicted in Bridal Plasty is to get plastic surgery before your wedding to have “perfect” wedding. One British article claims this trend is due to women’s desires to be ever sexier, “Ten years ago you could not use the word "sexy" in the same sentence as "bride" - it was not considered appropriate - but now most brides want to show off their figure.”They feel that the only way to be sexy is to change their bodies. Disturbingly, I found one plastic surgeon that actually has created a timeline on his website of what procedures to get and how soon before the wedding. It is alarming how long the list is and curious that the costs are not included on the chart. Also interesting, is that this plastic surgeon has posted links to bridal shops and salons to assist the women in their transformations. What is most troubling is that these women on the show are all brides to be. They are clearly loved and yet they somehow still feel inadequate. I’m sure their fiancés love their bodies just as they are or they would not have proposed; it is sad that the women cannot also love themselves. Changing your body to the point of being unrecognizable is not a good idea right before you enter a holy matrimony. The strength of these relationships was built on a certain dynamic, and such a dynamic will inevitably change after the bride undergoes a total transformation. It is dangerous to assume you will have a stronger marriage just because you will be a stereotypically prettier bride.

Furthermore, many plastic surgeons disagree with rewarding women with plastic surgery and question the ethics of the doctors willing to do the procedures: “It totally undermines the doctor-patient relationship," says Dr. Gayle Gordillo, associate professor plastic surgery at Ohio State University. "The ethical and social implications of this [show] are frightening." The article continues on to explore the probability of Body Dysmorphic Disorder within the patients. Multiple and repetitive cosmetic surgeries can be signs pointing to this disorder in which patients imagine physical flaws obsessively. They incessantly choose to have such “flaws” perfected and yet are never happy with the result; they continue to find problems with their physiques. It is a manifestation of one’s desire to achieve perfection and may result from low self-esteem. Doctors willing to operate on such patients only play into the disorder allowing it to spiral out of control. Plastic surgeons need to act ethically and the cycle.

I was shocked to learn that on a website dedicated to Body Dysmorphic Disorder the entire page is loaded with links to plastic surgeon websites and at the top there is even an ad for Botox. Treatment for BDD involves antidepressants as well as behavioral therapy to help end such obsessive thoughts about appearance. It is suggested that patients stop checking their defects and stop getting procedures to correct them: “While it may seem that a procedure to "fix" your perceived flaw is a good option, cosmetic surgery, dentistry or other approaches usually don't relieve the stress and shame of body dysmorphic disorder...Cosmetic procedures don't treat your underlying condition — they are only temporary fixes, at best.” Undergoing dangerous surgeries and disorders like BDD demonstrate how our flawed belief system is actually causing damage to our health. Shows, like Bridal Plasty that highlight the perceived benefits to such extreme measures are ignoring the undermining issue of low self esteem.

            Overall, the show Bridal Plasty is troubling for the dangerous precedents it sets for women. Women are now expected to go under the knife to look absolutely perfect for their wedding day. However, in a world that bombards us with images of beauty, advertisements for miraculous results, and procedures you can get at the dentist, this may not be surprising; the bar is constantly being raised and women will go to more extreme measures to meet the ridiculous standards. The show is a social commentary on or societal obsession with appearance. It seems counterintuitive to change oneself on the very day that a husband pledges his complete love for the bride just as she is, “for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish; from this day forward until death do us part” but I guess the vows don’t include a wrinkles clause.

New Flash: "The Rise of Sarah Palin Politics"

The results of the recent midterm election put women in the politics in an interesting position. For the first time in decades, the number of women in Congress has declined. This trend is particularly peculiar given the most recent presidential election. For the first time in the history of the United States electing a female president or female vice president because a very real possibility, during the 2008 presidential election. Despite the fact that the election did not result in a female president or vice president, it gave hope to many Americans, especially feminists, that women were coming closer in gaining political equality. Also emerging from the 2008 election was the Republican maverick, Sarah Palin. Gaining attention for her comical one-liners and her dedication to Alaska and motherhood, Palin has now become a highly influential member of the Republican Party. During these midterm elections, Palin took it upon herself to lend her support to her fellow party members, especially for the female Republican candidates. Surprisingly, Palin’s endorsements garnered significant amount of support for a majority of the candidates in question. The New York Times article, “Palin’s Endorsements Lay Base for a 2012 Run,” calls to question Sarah Palin’s involvement in the midterm elections and whether it was a strategy for laying a foundation for a presidential nomination in the 2012 election. Regardless of the scrutiny Sarah Palin has received for her unique political technique and use of the media, the results of the midterm elections indicate that this approach may resonate better with the public than the staunch feminist one used by the majority of female politicians.

Sarah Palin has been able to utilize the media to build her fan basis as well as to foster support for the politicians she choose to endorse in the midterm elections. After capitalizing on the various media outlets in the 2008 presidential election, Palin continued to use these media outlets to promote her candidates for Congress. Christine O’Donnell’s highly publicized campaign for Senate was Sarah Palin’s brainchild. O’Donnell’s campaign and the resulting backlash eerily resembled Palin’s in 2008. Each woman was bombarded by questions and interviews that addressed concerns about their qualifications for running for office. Both also became targets of Saturday Night Live attacks. In each case, the women tried compensate for their questionable pasts and under qualifications by playing up their womanly charm to seduce the public. Particularly in Sarah Palin’s case, she went as far as to denounce feminism and promote her housewife values. Her SNL spoof highlights her strategy. To get where she is today, Palin has used the media to promote her enlightened sexism approach to politics. When discussing Sarah Palin’s role in politics, Douglas describes the media’s coverage of her, “Recently there was a woman who commanded the national stage, attempting to take on a role no woman had before. She was, of course, attractive- she had to be- and had a set of skills that made her seem right for the job… some Americans- particularly male pundits- remained deeply uncomfortable with ambitious women” (267). Although Douglas is definitely not a fan of Sarah Palin, she does acknowledge that Palin successfully played up her feminine wiles to gain media attention. Whether the media has displayed Palin in a positive or negative light, she has still received an extraordinary amount of face time and has been able to get her name out there, which helped the Republican Party in these midterm elections and will potentially open doors for her in the 2012 presidential election.

Rather than taking a feminist approach to politics, Sarah Palin has capitalized on her motherly qualities to convince the public that she a qualified political leader. In fact, Sarah Palin has all together denounced feminism. When running for Vice President, she promoted the idea that women did not need to forfeit their responsibilities at home to pursue their careers. She fully embraces her motherhood and uses it as a point to separate herself from other politicians. She has even given herself the nickname, “Mama Grizzly.” Sarah Palin has used these family and home-based values to reach out to the American public. In a way, Palin denies the existence of a “Mommy Tax,” by putting up the façade that she can easily balance her home life and career. In reality, the public is aware that this is not true, given the media coverage of her family. Palin is so determined to keep up this public image of a perfect mother and career woman that she is now starring in her own reality television show, “Sarah Palin’s Alaska,” which documents her home state and family interactions. When choosing Republican candidates to endorse, Palin particularly sought after female candidates, who share her same conservative values and public image of putting family first, despite their career choices. Newly elected South Carolina governor, Nikki Haley, was quickly taken under Palin’s wing, as they worked to promote her image as a politician dedicated to her family. According the New York Times article, Palin’s publicized support for such candidates may be a part of a larger campaign strategy to not only alter the values voters expect their politicians to live by, but to also secure her spot as a viable candidate in the 2012 presidential election.

The success of Sarah Palin’s approach to politics calls to question the future of feminism in politics. It was alarming, especially for feminists, to watch as Sarah Palin’s endorsement of various Republican candidates had such positive effects on voter approval. Douglas describes (in a disturbing way) Sarah Palin’s viewpoints and her opposition to feminist ideology,

So here was a woman who was anti-choice, anti-sex education (that worked out well), anti-day care, using the gains of women’s movement to run for office, and to silence those who might have a few questions about her qualifications. Pit bull feminism was about exploiting forty years of activism, lawsuits, legislative changes, and consciousness- raising- all of which Palin benefited from- in the hope of undoing them all (271).

The rise of Sarah Palin and anti-feminist politics is especially concerning given the steep decline in the number of women in Congress after the midterm election. The majority of the women voted out of office were women who had fought and represented feminist ideals. Several of these women were even elected in 1992, during the “Year of the Woman.” Meanwhile, the number of women being voted into office support Sarah Palin’s anti-feminist political ideology. While there are other external factors that could explain this transition, it is difficult not to be worried that years of feminists’ hard work have been reversed, and Sarah Palin’s politics is becoming the new norm for female politicians.

Response to Sara

The reading for this week was really interesting. Mink brings up excellent points about how welfare is both a class and race issue and that middle class feminist were not concerned with it because it is not a main threat to them. Women working in the home as caregivers is important as being the caregivers of other people's children. Sara and Carolyn both raise excellent points in their interpretations of Mink's article. The idea that childcare is in fact really expensive and these single mothers are working to pay others to care for their child when they can just stay home and do so is an issue. The fact that the jobs that are offered to these single mothers are low wage jobs they cannot afford to get out of poverty if they have to pay a great amount to childcare. The point that Carolyn brought up is really interesting and one that i didn't think of as far as welfare reform. I agree that welfare needs to be reformed but the idea that it could be optional for women to work but still have some sort of requirement method for welfare checks that deal with the home like classes on parenting or working from home are great ideas. This method is similar to what they do with people who receive unemployment checks. This article really uncovered how single mothers are being marginalized as a group and how welfare affects them directly and if it is an issue for so many women why is it not a main concern of feminists?

Response to Sara

I feel that Mink made some good points in her article but she did not completely convince me of her argument. I do agree that welfare needs to be reformed because of the many loopholes through which single mothers seem to fall, but I also think that the welfare system as a whole needs to change for men and women alike. Especially in our current economic situation, the nation should be spending their dollars wisely; we need to ensure that we are spending our money effectively. In terms of welfare, I think that this means the money should be going to the people most in need and most deserving. There are many people that may need welfare but are taking advantage of the system. My father works as a welfare fraud investigator, and I have heard anecdotal evidence of the many ways in which people take advantage of the system. He alone, recovered about one million dollars for the state. I think if welfare reform was passed, the government should include harsher punishments for those that violate the law, so that there is more money to spread to the honest people. I understand that single mothers are forced to work outside of the home, and this may be detrimental, but there may be no other way to ensure that mothers are working to pull themselves out of poverty. We cannot police homes enough to ensure that the women are in fact raising their children well, keeping a nice home, etc. That work is of course valuable work but there just may be not simple way to ensure that such women are in fact doing that. Perhaps if the law included something about required parenting classes or a course about working from within the home such a law would not need to be included.

Main Reading Post for 11/04

The article, “The Lady and the Tramp(II): Feminist Welfare Politics, Poor Single Mothers, and the Challenge of Welfare Justice,” discusses the failure of upper to middle class feminists to stand up for poor women without a voice in promoting their rights to welfare. Mink states that these feminists are supporting gender inequalities and a female caste system by not standing up for poor women during the welfare debate. The welfare bill that passed Congress requires women who receive welfare to acquire jobs outside of the home. The bill only specifically mentions women, which Mink argues segregates poor women and recognizes them as a separate “caste group.” She especially points the blame at female politicians who idly stood by and let Republicans implement the bill. She claims that women, especially the politicians could have made a difference because of their unique position within the government, that people would have been forced to listen to them. By requiring women on welfare to work outside the home to qualify for it, the article claims that women are being deprived of equal citizenship. The bill also intensified racial divisions.

I think one of the article’s most interesting points is when it states that these white middle class feminists view mothers who need welfare as women who really need feminism and victims of a patriarchical system. Many feminists view the home as a site of oppression. But little to they realize that being able to stay home with their children without the need to make a salary is a luxury. I definitely agree with Mink on this point. Childcare is extremely expensive, and if these women on welfare are forced to work outside the home, then a large part of their salary will then have to go towards paying for childcare. Additionally, it is not fair for feminists to claim that really all these women need is feminism in their lives. Clearly the women on welfare have much more important things to think about or work towards then going the feminist movement. This feminist assumption is a fairly ignorant one.

''The Stripper Myth'' Response to Carolyn

The readings for this week they all dealt with what women have to go through in regards to the work force but focused primarily of poor or underclass women. I appreciate all the article's and "Mommy Tax" shed light on the issue of being a mother and having a career a issue we had discussed earlier in the class. The reading that really stood out to me was in Listen Up. "Reality Check" really interested me because as a college student I feel like we could all relate to Hakin-Dyce in her efforts to find a job which we probably all will be doing after college. This story reminded me of man jokes and movies that i have heard or seen. The most recent is a joke Chris Rock tells about the "Stripper Myth".




Another movie that I think talks about a girl in a similar position but she chooses to strip and we learn about her struggles with that is "Players Club". This is a real scary issue that becomes a reality for so many women.

Summary for 11/2

The four readings for class all discussed the costs related to being a woman. In the workplace, women are not afforded the same rights as men. More specifically, women with children are often discriminated against and many other women are forced to turn to sexually demoralizing jobs to make ends meet. “The Mommy Tax” by Crittenden explores the myth that women are equal in the job force. One anti-feminist group claimed that women made ninety cents to every man’s dollar and Crittenden challenges the claim stating it does not include women with children. Women with children make a measly seventy cents to every man’s dollar. Furthermore, they are often forced to take unpaid maternity leave and work schedules that pull them away from their children for fear of consequences. Crittendon includes several anecdotes to prove her point, including her own story about the loss of a calculated $600,000. Rather than leaving the job force altogether, many women opt to work part time. Crittendon goes on to show that part time mothers make disproportionately less money for their hours; many claim the workload is actually the same as a full time job and they are just making less money. I felt that Crittendon made some very good points in her article I was just a little disturbed when she wrote that “It seems like a high price to pay for doing the right thing” (89). I think it is judgemental of Crittendon to write that the “right thing” is for women to quit their jobs to raise their children. Many women successfully raise happy and healthy children while working part time or full time jobs. Crittendon should have also considered the prospect of the father staying home to raise the children. I think it is only a very small minority of women that can afford to raise their children in Crittenden’s “right way.”
“Maid to Order” by Ehrenreich explores the growing trend of housemaids. She explains how paying someone seems to justify demeaning them and the majority of these workers are women forced into these careers for financial reasons, “But in a society in which 40 percent of the wealth is owned by 1 percent of households while the bottom 20 percent reports negative assets, the degradation of others is readily purchased,” (59). This type of job creates a unique predicament for the working class. Pay for some companies is strictly controlled based on attendance, a problem for women that may have children, unreliable transportation, etc. The nature of the work is also troubling for one’s health. Women especially strain their knees and backs while working and the job is not meant to ever be held long term. Beyond damaging the workers, this growing trend is teaching children “that some people are less worthy than others, that the employer has ‘something better’ to do with her time.” I think this is an interesting point to make because all of the people I know that have cleaning maids take little responsibility for their belongings. They do not pick up after themselves because they assume that someone will do it for them. Cleaning is seen as a waste of time and left for someone that has nothing better to do.
The remaining two pieces appear in Listen Up. The first, “Reality Check” explores one woman’s struggle to avoid poverty while also avoiding demeaning jobs. As a college student, the author was trying her best to make it by and was almost forced into becoming a go-go dancer. I think this can be tied back to “Maid to Order” because women can be forced into a variety of jobs that are demeaning to women, if not explicitly sexual. Being forced into cleaning up after a man can be understood as equally demeaning as being sexually objectified by a man. The other article “Knowledge is Power” explores one woman’s challenges on welfare. She writes how no one chooses to be on welfare or wants to be on welfare. I must disagree with this point. While I feel that the majority of women on welfare do not want to be on welfare, there are a lot of people (including women) that do choose to remain on welfare. My father works as a welfare fraud investigator and he examines these cases daily. There are many women that lie in order to gain more money from the government; many say that they are raising their children alone, are paying for daycare, and job searching while they are not. Many young women are also encouraged to get pregnant at a young age in order to receive welfare. For most people I would agree that being on welfare is unfortunate and stigmatized, but I think the people abusing the system need to be reprimanded before the system can begin to offer more services.

Response to Readings for 11/02

These readings were really interesting in the way they each went about describing women and their subservient role in the workforce. In almost each reading, it was very obvious that women were forced by patriarchal systems to have a marginalized role. It is so easy to buy into the arguments made that women are earning close to the same amount as men now a days, but in reality those women selected in the surveys are upper-middle class white women. In reality, women as a whole are still highly discriminated against. In the "Mommy Tax" article, it was shocking the prejudices that women face as a result of becoming a mother and still trying to maintain her career. It is very unfortunate that the United States cannot be on the same page as France and Scandinavian countries with their laws protecting women and mothers in the work place. It was also shocking to see how ineffective welfare actually is in the article, "Knowledge is Power." There are so many preconceived notions about welfare the the good it supposedly does, but after reading this article it become very apparent that it just creates so many loopholes for the recipients that it is almost not worth the while.

The one article that I didn't completely agree with was, "Maid to Order." In it, Ehrenreich blames feminists for the rise in the use of maids and other people to do things that housewives now neglect or don't feel like doing. After reading it, I couldn't help but not that without this transition, many of the women would be out of a job, if there wasn't a demand for maid services. While it may be true that the work can be demeaning, underpaid, and a resulting diffusion of responsibility, it should be noted that at the end of the day, these maids have a job and a lot of them are better off doing that then something else or not getting paid at all.

Follow up to Media Project

I just found this article in today's New York Times. It supports the claims made in my media project about the pressure on young pop stars to become hyper-sexual. Enjoy!