Response for 12/7

I think this reading neatly summarized many of the ideas in this course. After reading Enloe’s chapters  and reflecting back on the topics discussed in class, I realized that women related issues can be found everywhere. The items we have discussed in this class are merely the tip of the iceberg; as evidenced by people’s newsflashes, a wide array of feminist problems are emerging daily.  I think it is a very good idea to always question one’s environment. As the saying goes, “Why are things the way they are and not otherwise?” We have already discussed that patriarchy is a sneaky system that infiltrates our lives in ways that we don’t even consciously realize. By turning daily happenings into conscious decisions changes can be brought about. This is not to say that one should be constantly paranoid about social norms, but a small level of skepticism seems appropriate. Subsequently unexpected positive changes may occur. I think this is one of the main ideas I will take away from this class. 

Follow up Response: 12/07

The two chapters we read from the Curious Feminist promote the need of feminism in a patriarchal society. In these two chapters, Enloe encourages people to remain curious and question the framework of this intrinsically patriarchal society. Instead of women sitting back and falling into the roles expected of them, they should embrace feminist ideology and question these patriarchal male authorities. Enloe states that “uncuriosity” is dangerous because it breeds conformity to societal ideology. In the push for feminist curiosity, women become very aware of patriarchy and see beyond what everyone else sees in these types of societies. In the second chapter Enloe encourage people to admit “surprise” and welcome it. She claims that surprise helps women to prepare for what lays ahead. She mentions several events in the late 20^th century that have surprised her and have forced her to rationalize the situations in a new light. These readings were great because they brought our semester and what we have learned to a full circle.

Curiosity and Suprise fuels Feminism

The readings for this week were especially interesting and really tied in the ideas of this class together for me. Feminism for me seemed narrow and after reading these chapters I realized how broad feminism is and how intertwined it is in many issues around the globe. I really like how Enloe speaks in "Being Curious about our Lack of Feminist Curiosity” introduction about how the rhetoric surrounding gender is normalized so that we think nothing of it. She talks about how natural then progresses to traditional, and oldest and then always. Which is funny to me because in school especially science I learned if a multiple question said always it was usually wrong. Always becomes a catch all and generalization so that we can neglect being curious. If we think that something has been around forever there is no need to challenge it because that is just the way it is. She says "I've come to think that making and keeping us uncurious must serve somebody's political purpose." By being curious we can question issues and search for the answers that are not so simple. We will be able to see how patriarchy operates in everything and how that can be disguised as nationalism and other disguises. In the first chapter "The Surprised Feminist" I really likes how she looks at surprise and how when we are surprised at things we disregard it like we knew that or just all together dismiss it because it doesn't fit with our notions or opinions. I think addressing the surprising information gives you another view and allow you to do further research and help to understand the whole picture. I think curiousity and surprise are ideas that make a great feminist as well as a great scientist in any field.

The Deception of Anti-Abortion Clinics

The article I chose from Ms. Magazine deals with Crisis Pregnancy Centers or CPC’s. The article talks about how these clinics often disguise and deceive young women into thinking that they perform abortions but in actuality they are anti-abortion clinics that badger young women and make them feel guilty so that they will change their minds. These clinics are funded by federal and state offices even though they have fraudulent practices and violence. I think that these clinics do have a right to be in existence but I think that they should state their mission and stance on pregnancy and abortion and not be allowed to be in such close vicinity to abortion clinics. I feel that the decision to have an abortion is not an easy one. Many women don’t make this decision on a whim. Pregnant women who have chosen this decision are in a state where they are vulnerable and I think that these clinics capitalize on that. These clinics that push their pro-life and anti-abortion agendas don’t take into count the individual and their situation they are just about telling them abortion is wrong and adoption is the only alternative if you don’t want to raise your child. They often make you feel bad if you even considered abortion and tell you that life begins at birth. Some of these clinics are associated with churches and can use religion to get the girl to change her mind. At the end of the day the decision is up to the woman but a woman who has made a decision should not be deceived into changing her mind.

The article talks initially about the murder of Dr. George Tiller and how the anti-abortion extremist that stalked and hounded him before murdering him. The man would be a sidewalk counselor and dissuade women from going into the abortion clinic where the doctor worked. The CPC that is located next door to Tiller’s clinic appeared to be a medical clinic as well even thought they did not perform any medical procedures. The CPC’s estimated 4,000 nationwide often mislead women and give them false information about their due dates and about the unproven links between abortion and infertility, cancer, and suicide. These tactics are used to dissuade women from considering abortion or even going into an abortion clinic. The extremist anti-abortion groups have been linked to these CPC’s and has caused more violent incidents than clinics that are not near CPC’s. The idea is that they will do anything to get their point across and ultimately they want abortion to be abolished.

I have been to one of those CPC’s with a friend and we did think that it was an abortion clinic. When we got there and spoke to the counselor we realized that this was in fact not an abortion clinic but an anti-abortion clinic. We did not want to be rude so we heard the counselor out. She talked about how she had her son young and she would not change her decision for the world and how she also adopted some children and she loved all of them equally. She also told us what we thought were facts about abortion and gave us booklets and pamphlets on adoption and raising children. She informed us about some statistics of abortion and how abortion is linked to cancer and told my friend to inform the dad and her mom and that adoption is always an option. She also told us that life begins at conception and since thou shall not kill that abortion was wrong. Lastly she said we could call and make a follow-up appointment and we left. We were highly upset when we left. The misinformation and the deception were what really had an impact on us. We threw all the pamphlets away and my friend called Planned Parenthood the next day. The whole ordeal was exactly how they describe in the article with the misleading and misinformation. This is an issue that a women should have complete control over and when people try to influence that decision with their own opinions it is not okay just as in the article in Listen Up “And So I Chose” she could see that women who had to make this choice had to do what was best for them and picketing and yelling at the girl just made it harder for the person. The right to choose is a right I think that all women should have and no one should be able to infringe upon that right.

I think that CFC’s and their practices such as sidewalk counseling are wrong. These procedures make it really difficult for a woman to deal with her decision to have an abortion and they infringe upon her right. I think that like in the story in Listen Up “Vacuum Cleaners, Abortion, and the Power Within” we should make abortions less public and more private because if someone has decided to have an abortion they should not be harassed about their decision by people from CFC’s or anybody. Making abortion somehow more private would be a great solution. Having a natural abortion or a low-cost abortion pill would save a lot of women stress and grief. The decision to have an abortion is a private one and the idea of having to go into a clinic and have someone do this medical procedure and also being harassed makes it very hard for women to deal with their decision. It is her decision ultimately and being deceived and mislead to change her mind is wrong and should not be tolerated. This is something that we need to come to a consensus about.

How Young is Too Young?

            It is no surprise in today’s society that fashion models are scrutinized for their bodies; the very nature of their work places them on display for others to judge them. Especially lately, models have been accused of being too thin and many countries have adopted policies that prevent models with BMI’s under 18 from walking the catwalk. People in the industry are being urged to recognize the signs of eating disorders especially after several cases of anorexia-related deaths. All of these policies seem to be a step in the right direction for the fashion world. However, a new question has emerged within the business- how young is too young for models? Several agencies have curtailed the issue of finding healthy thin models by selecting prepubescent girls that are “naturally” skinny. In 2007, Maddison Gabriel, a 12 year old Australian girl was selected to be the face of Australia’s Gold Coast Fashion Week. The decreasing age of fashion models, like Maddison Gabriel, reflects the early sexualization of young girls in society; this dangerous trend in the fashion industry can result in a host of detrimental mental health issues and must be carefully regulated.

            Maddison Gabriel was selected September 11, 2007 to be the face of the esteemed Gold Coast Fashion Week hosted each year in Australia. When selected she was only twelve years old, and celebrated her thirteenth birthday on the 15th. This announcement sparked controversy around the world and especially among fellow fashion designers. Gabriel was surprised herself at winning the prize, “I was just like ‘what?’” (Syers) but hoped that the opportunity would launch her career, “It’s my dream to become a top model,” (Syers). Especially surprising was that the tween was selected to be “the Face” for the fashion week. The title requires additional responsibilities including additional modeling, marketing, advertising, and publicity events and is therefore usually delegated to an older more experienced model.

            Many countries in Europe and the US have posed age restrictions for models walking the catwalk and yet in Australia, delegating age limits is the responsibility of individual modeling agencies. The Prime Minister, John Howard, called the decision “outrageous” and explained “There should be age limits, I mean there has to be, we do have to preserve some notion of innocence in our society” (dailymail). He hoped to model  (no pun intended) the Australian fashion industry after those in Europe. However, such age restrictions in countries with prohibitive laws are not particularly enforced; many models are imported from eastern European nations because it is easy to mask their actual age.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqVZsrPkhcw

Many do not see any problem with young models and point to other child stars as successful precedents. Gabriel and her mother defended the decision; Maddison explained, “I believe that I can fit into women's clothes. I can model women's clothes, so I should be able to do it,” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk). Mrs. Gabriel also defended the decision stating, “The thing is, Maddy is a mature 12-year-old,” (goldcoast.com). Simone Hyde who owns the agency that represents Gabriel explained that Maddison would not be involved in any bikini or lingerie events. Other events around the employ models just as young if not younger, like this ten year old modeling for Ashley Paige:

           

Many people however see the decision as a terrible move for the industry. Countries in Europe and the US have posed age restrictions for models walking the catwalk and yet in Australia, delegating age limits is the responsibility of individual modeling agencies. The Prime Minister, John Howard, called the decision “outrageous” and explained “There should be age limits, I mean there has to be, we do have to preserve some notion of innocence in our society” (dailymail). He hoped to model  (no pun intended) the Australian fashion industry after those in Europe. However, such age restrictions in countries with prohibitive laws are not particularly enforced; many models are imported from eastern European nations because it is easy to mask their actual age.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqVZsrPkhcw

Nonetheless, former child models and scientists disagree with choosing tweens stating that placing young girls in a stressful environment that equates value with physical perfection is toxic to their development. The Independent Model Health Inquiry met in London in 2007 and found that models under the age of 16 were particularly vulnerable to developing eating disorders and sexual exploitation when expected to look like adult women. Janice Dickinson in an interview with Matt Lauer discussed her disappointment with the decision and explained that it was just wrong.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/20829880/ns/today-today_people/

 Child stars in other industries have been under similar pressures with mixed results. Acresses like Brooke Shields, Shirley Temple, and Jodie Foster were all feature in sexually charged films when they were around Gabriel’s age and went on to lead relatively normal healthy lives. However many other child stars have not been as successful. Critics point to celebrities like Michael Jackson, Drew Barrymore, and Britney Spears to potray the problems associated with too much fame too soon.

            The early sexualization of girls has been linked to numerous mental health concerns. The APA Task Force’s report on the Sexualization of Girls associated the problems of eating disorders, low self esteem and depression  with early sexualization; such disorders are the most common mental health disorders among girls and women.

The Task Force Report states that sexualization has negative effects in a variety of domains:

            Cognitive and emotional health: Sexualization and objectification undermine a person's confidence in and comfort with her own body, leading to emotional and self-image problems, such as shame and anxiety.

            Mental and physical health: Research links sexualization with three of the most common mental health problems diagnosed in girls and women—eating disorders, low self-esteem, and depression or depressed mood.

                        Sexual development: Research suggests that the sexualization of girls has negative consequences on girls' ability to develop a healthy sexual self-image.

Natavia Vodianova, a supermodel that began her carrer at 18 explained, “It is very hard to have a feeling of stability. Anorexia is sometimes the only form of control these girls have” (http://www.thecrimson.com) Diane Levin, the author of “So Sexy So soon: The Sexualization of Childhood in Commercial Culture” explains that sex itself is not the problem so much as the way it is portrayed. Instead of healthy information being potrayed about sex, girls are learning to look a certain way to be considered sexy.  They are then learning that being sexy is the only way they are valued within society. “ Girls are taught to be sexy…they’re not learning to treat others as people, they’re learning to treat others as objects”(http://www.suite101.com) .

            Overall, the modeling industry is creating a dangerous paradigm for their models. Women are being chosen younger and younger and developing serious health issues. As younger girls are being chosen, more are entering the industry so more age appropriate models are hard to find. Such tween models are a magnified example of the harms of early sexualizaion of girls. There must be more regulation within the fashion world to ensure that mature women that can handle the stresses of the occupation are chosen so girls are not developing problems later in life. Thankfully, many fashion designers are raising their standards for their models and emphatically refusing to employ girls. Hopefully others will lead the examples of such designers as Calvin Klein and Michael Kors and change the sexual fate for girls.

            

3rd News Flash: Military Mothers

As the number of women in the work force has steadily increased over time, the number of women in the military has also simultaneously increased in the twenty first century. Now more than ever, women comprise a growing percentage of the United States military. Serving in all branches of the military, women are proving to be an important asset, especially in these times of war. What is even more significant is that a large percentage of these women are mothers. As experienced by mothers entering the mainstream work force, women in the military are finding it especially difficult (probably even more so) to juggle their careers and their life at home with their families. Serving in the military and trying to parent children is far from easy and requires a great deal of choice and sacrifices to be made. The New York Times article, “Wartime Soldier, Conflicted Mom,” discusses the hardships women in the military face when trying to balance their two lives and having to choose between serving their country and staying at home with their families. This article highlights the fact that despite the strides made to accommodate women in the military, there still remains major shortcomings, as women try to carryout their duties not only to their country, but also to their families.

The author, Lizette Alvarez, conducted interviews with several mothers who served or are currently serving in the military. The women’s responses clearly demonstrate the difficulties a mother faces while enlisted, and the consequences experienced by her and her family. The two wars being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan have made these women’s lives even more complicated, as more soldiers are being deployed and the possibility of injury or death has increased. Since 2001, the number of female recruits has actually declined by 5 percent, a much more significant number than the decline in the number of male recruits. Of the number of women who have served in the two wars, 100,000 are mothers, and half of them have been deployed to the war zones. Furthermore, the majority of these mothers in the military are primary caregivers, or single parents. Without a draft and a dwindling number of recruits, the military is now faced with the challenge of boosting interest in joining. The first step is to try to make service members (especially women) feel as if they don’t have to choose between their family life and their military careers. Shelley MacDermid Wadsworth, a director of the Military Family Research Institute at Purdue University, comments on this dilemma military mothers face, “They leave when they can’t figure out a way to do both.” Because of job security, good pay, and great benefits, women are often compelled to maintain their military careers because it ultimately provides a better life for their families. Additionally, many women feel a sense of pride and responsibility to defend their country. These reasons are used to weigh against the repercussions felt at home. At times it is difficult to find care providers for children, especially for single mothers, while on tour. Even more troublesome, are the effects children of women serving in the military experience. Children often: become depressed, develop anxiety, suffer in school, start wetting the bed, cry more, or become reclusive and defiant. The women interviewed were faced with the difficulty of weighing the consequences of their absence, due to their career choice, and trying to strike a balance between the two. Unfortunately, the current nature and demands of a military career do not make this an easy task. In some of the interviewed women’s situations, they ultimately decided to retire from the military life and devote their full attention to their families, while others decided to return for another tour.

Just like other women in the mainstream workforce, women serving in the military are being forced to make some tough decisions when it comes to their careers and families. But it seems like even more so than mainstream working women, these military women have a more difficult time balancing these two aspects of their lives because their careers are so demanding and require them to be away from their families for extended periods of time. Not only are these women feeling pressure from the military to choose, but their families and the repercussions of their decisions put them in a tougher situation. The double bind mothers in the military experience tends to be especially exaggerated. While patriarchal society pushes women to stay home and take care of their families, there is another aspect of this society that promotes staunch patriotism and calls for people to defend our freedom. For these women caught between the call of these two duties, the choice can be almost impossible to make. The context of Marilyn Frye’s article, “Oppression,” is easily applicable to the oppression mothers in the military experience through the creation of this double bind. When describing an oppressive double bind, Frye writes, “One of the most characteristic and ubiquitous features of the world as experienced by oppressed people is the double bind – situations in which options are reduced to a very few and all of them expose one to penalty, censure or deprivation.” Mothers in the military are especially prone to penalties from both sides. Many of the interviewed women talked about the penalties they incurred. While on tour, some mothers missed their child’s first steps or words and other precious family moments. And when home with their families, some of the women experienced guilt for not being on the front line defending the country, or sacrificed financial gains by having to retire early. Based on the interviewed women’s responses it is glaringly obvious that mothers in the military are susceptible to the “mommy tax.” When forced to choose family over career, especially before reaching their retirement time, mothers in the military are heavily “taxed.” Crittenden explains the consequences of this tax, “For working-class women, there is increasing evidence both in the United States and worldwide that mothers’ differential responsibility for children, rather than classic sex discrimination, is the most important factor disposing women to poverty.” Crittenden identifies a key point about the “mommy tax’s” ability to drive a family into poverty. This point is especially true for service women. A large percent of the people serving in the military are of the middle to lower class. Without the steady income and benefits coming in from a military job, mothers (especially single mothers) are often forced into poverty. As if serving in the military while two wars are going on were not stressful enough, the double bind oppressing mothers serving in the military is enough to send them over the edge.

The double bind and oppression experienced by mothers in the military is intrinsic of our patriarchal society. The military is founded upon patriarchal ideology. Since males dominate the military, there is little understanding of the issues these women face, or effort made to make accommodations for them. This prevailing patriarchal system is further perpetuated by women desire to prove themselves as an integral part of the military. Just as national pride provokes men to prove their masculinity, women in the military often experience a similar need to show aggression and prove their toughness. While Cynthia Enloe writes in The Curious Feminist that only men experience this type of national politics, the women interviewed in the article talk about the difficulty in switching mentalities when returning home and caring for their children. The women explain that upon returning home from a tour, they would often become agitated with the children and react more harshly towards them than they would normally. Additionally they discussed how the military’s expectation of them to be tough and to be on their “A game” makes it extremely difficult to balance the different emotions and interactions as a mother then as a soldier. When talking about her children, one woman stated, “To hear them cry and miss me would keep me out of the game. It would make it hard to put the game face on.” From these interviews it is clear that the strain put on mothers in the military to fall in line with the ideology of the extreme patriarchal system that is the military is relatively unrealistic when trying to balance their careers and family life. While these issues and inadequacies are prevalent, Johnson’s article, “Patriarchy, the System,” demonstrates that system is not only influenced by just men, and states that women need to “take a different path” to stand up for their rights in order to invoke positive change.

Although the military has recently started making accommodations for women and mothers serving in the military in order to boost recruitment numbers, there is still not enough being done. Regardless of the military’s argument that these women are not being forced to decide between their careers and families, the strains being put of them from both sides is way too overwhelming. Surveys show that women respond much better to more flexible schedules than financial incentives. Perhaps if the military began allowing serving mothers to spend more time with their families without penalizing them, then they would be able to retain a higher number of enlisted women. Serving in the military is such a honorable job, it is unfair that mothers are being forced to decide between their duties to their country and to their family.

Readings for 12/2

The readings for this class were about feminist issues and how they relate to terrorism. Lila Abu-Lughod explained how the United States is using an ethnocentric view to justify the war on terrorism in Afghanistan.  Instead of just fighting terrorism against the United States, the war has also come to represent a moral issue about women's rights. We are being led to believe that women in Afghanistan are being oppressed and are therefore radically relieved after US troops remove the Taliban. Specifically, the burka has come to symbolize the oppressive regime and the plight of Afghan women. This is however unrealistic. First, the burka can not represent all of the problems faced by Afghan women. It is simply an article of clothing and does not encompass many other issues present in society. Second, the burka has been present in Aghanistan long before the Taliban. It represents a woman's piety to God and is frequently worn elsewhere in the world voluntarily. Their presence has become the social norm in such societies, "so conventional that most women gave little thought to their meaning." Expecting Afghan women to completely change their style simply because a new government is in place is unfair. Instead, the government should enable the women to have a choice in their wardrobe, rather than forcing them into either burkas or Levi's. We must remember that forcing American ideals on other countries is not "saving" the other country, it is in my opinion, just installing new and different oppressive laws.

Bunch wrote in her article "Whose Security" about the effects that the war on terror has here in the Unite d States. After 9/11, the United States experience a "resurgence of the masculine warrior discourse." Women's issues were therefore pushed aside for more pressing matters of national security. Within the media, strong males were depicted in order to reassure audiences of the strength of our nation  but they also "served as a rude reminder that when it comes to ussues of terrorism, war, defense, and national security, women and especially feminists are still not on the map" Bunch goes on into further detail about how the Bush administration weakened the protection for human rights all in the name of fighting terrorism. Lowering standards for human rights sets a dangerous precedent for women's rights and is therefore a problem for feminists. She concludes by stating "women's activism in the United States must be both local and global to succeed." We must remember that foreign policy effects domestic policy and vice versa.

Enloe similarly writes how wars have impacted the roles of women in society. She explains how such policy-makers as varied as empire-builders to NATO have directly impacts women's lives. Enloe also discusses Afghan women's roles in society, or lack thereof. They have been left out of constitution writing processes and are therefore voiceless in terms of the law. Enloe writes how "closed-door bargainers" are the people with the loudest voices in the process because they are actually able to gather weapons, men, and economic resources which subsequently leads to public support. Afghan women are unable to establish connections and remain helpless. The future for Afghan women is not looking bright unless some major changes occur within the law writing process.

Feminism Abroad 12/2

The readings from this week were very interesting. They deal with ideas of Muslim women abroad and how it relates to feminism here in the United States. I found the Bunch article really interesting and remember how the Bush administration dealt with 9/11 and how it affected Americans view of Afghan people. The issues surrounding Muslim women in the middle east were a forefront in the minds of people but due to the way 9/11 was handled it was pushed to the back burner. The Abu-Lughod paper gave insight into Muslim women and their lives oversees and how everything that they go through is not to be seen as horrible but some of the issues such as Burqa are cultural and traditional issues and not problems that need to be helped by international intervention. The article also gave us a look into the politics of the middle east Muslim community and how gender is really tied into the way women are treated and perceived. This is just like what Cynthia Enloe was talking about in her chapter "Updating the Gendered Empire". She was saying how we must have an internationalized gender so that we can make feminist issues as important as politics of men internationally. We must have a outlet to here everyone's issues and not have women be silence at home as well as abroad.

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.