Hello, I have read an article that illustrates two components of what we have discussed in lecture as well as from the reading assigned this week. The article is from NPR called "Can Children Know, At Age 2, They Were Born With The 'Wrong Sex'" by Barabara J. King. This article describes a toddler, Kathryn, who since the age of two has identified herself as a boy. Her parents had originally thought this declaration was only a sign she was going through her "tomboy" phase. By the age of four, Kathryn's parents had accepted the reality that this was not a tomboy phase, but a true identification of gender. Upon Kathryn's instance, her parents "let her live as a boy." Kathryn began wearing clothing that marked her as a boy and changed her name to Tyler. This case poses several questions we had discussed in class including whether gender is determined by biological determinism or social constructionism. In this case, gender has been determined by both of these ideologies. When Kathryn was born, she was identified as a female because of the belief in biological determinism. However, once Kathryn became more aware of her cultural environment, she was able to voice and choose her own gender identity. By dressing "as a boy" and changing her name to a more masculine name, Tyler, she re-determined her gender identity through social constructionism. The notion of what clothes and names were appropriate for a boy, were determined and shaped by society's designation of gender roles, and thus applied to Tyler in order to reshape his gender identity. Though Tyler had made the decision himself to identify his own gender, he still followed the set gender roles that had been determined by society in order to mark his gender. For further reference: http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2012/05/24/153285061/can-children-know-at-age-2-they-were-born-the-wrong-sex
Beginning to read chapter 3, the text in one section in particular about "home" resonated with me a lot. The author writes " Home may be a geographic, social, emotional, and spiritual space where we hope to find safety, security, familiarity, continuity, acceptance, love, and understanding, and where we can feel and be our best, whole selves. Home may be in several places at once or in different places at different times of our lives." After reading this I had a very positive emotional response thinking of all the places where I have a home, such as at my parents house, out in the wilderness, or even here in Davis. Furthermore, it's interesting to think about how the places I consider to be home, or have considered to be home in the past, have intersected with my personal identities by helping shape them. Where is your home?
My home is wherever I feel comfortable. Davis is my new home! I agree with you about how places I consider to be my home helped shape my identity. Davis has helped me become independent and more productive with my school work. I miss the home I have always known, but Davis has strengthened my identity in a positive way.
When the author writes "Home may be in several places at once", I can relate to this since I am from out of state. Davis is one of my homes. So is downtown Seattle, Wailuku, and the planes that take me between homes. All these places are where I feel free, confident, and purely myself. I agree with Ashley on how Davis can help one become independent. However, I'd like to add that some homes influence a person more than others. Since coming to Davis, I identify with more communities than I did back in Seattle and express myself in ways I never considered. So far Davis has made the biggest impact on me.
I like how the author writes that "home may be in several places at once or in different places at different times of out lives". I fall into the category of the latter statement as I have lived in different countries and cities throughout my life which I believe have all had an effect in shaping who I am today and what i consider home. As with you, I see Davis as one of my homes, but ultimately home(s) for me are anywhere where i have family and friends and where i feel most comfortable.
Becoming a Gendered Body reminded me of another article in TIME magazine that I read a few months ago about a gender neutral school in Sweden. In this school, they actively try to remove the "hidden curriculum". For example, they teach emotions by using sexless dolls. Sweden as a whole has been very pro feminism, even creating a new neutral pronoun. This has benefited women as political representation is nearly even, as is in the workplace, and with fathers taking more childcare responsibility. I think this is really interesting to see because so much of society has been defined by the gender binary. How would it look without it? And how would it affect other discrimination? This would definitely change how people identify each other and themselves, but hopefully it will allow more people to have more opportunities and choices in their lives. (forgot to add the link: http://www.readington.k12.nj.us/cms/lib07/NJ01000244/Centricity/Domain/109/Boys%20Wont%20Be%20Boys.pdf)
Hiya, I just wanted to share a Snicker commerical link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW6ZXHWvaGc
These commercials have never really caught my attention but now taking another look at them they have a real act for going against attitudes that are usually placed on women who are deemed to act undesirably or as a nuisance by social standards. This can relate to the curriculum that is expected of women who are expected to act as docile and with no complaint that we read in the article assigned this past week. Anyone else ever find media examples like this?
I agree with you on a lot of different levels, I have seen this commercial various times and it never necessarily resonated with me as offensive or sexist. But after being in this class for a mere 3 weeks and analyzing the way women are viewed in the media I can see how this ad could be controversial. The fact that of all examples, they use a woman to be the "crabby, upset, complaining, diva." Although the two women they used are iconic actors, why couldn't they have painted them in a more positive light? Why do they subconsciously send the message over national TV that women are irritable? And I also found the ending, where all the other men in the car were relieved when the woman ate the snickers and turned back into a man upsetting as well. I think this was a great example of social media skewing gender roles
Sony's ad for the Ceramic White PSP released within Holland has drawn ire for its representation of racial skin tones. From what I have learned in my AMS021 class previously, this sense of standing out and being dominant comes from how soap was used during colonization in order to "civilize" indigenous people and to assimilate them into a soon-to-be dominant civilization through imperialism. This ad still portrays the legacies of racism. It also contrasts with the work antiracial feminism performs, which fights "against white supremacy and imperialism," according to Becky Thompson (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, 35). Such a representation of racial skin tones and women remains problematic to this day.
I totally agree with you and actually Snickers is pretty guilty of putting out a lot of sexist ads that encourage misogyny. There was even recently an Australian Snickers ad about "what construction workers do when they're 'not themselves'" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqgjTZQiySw Instead of catcalling and harassing women, these men are giving genuine compliments and shouting their support for gender equality, which is sort of sad considering the message at the end of the ad is "you're not you when you're hungry."
I also agree with you. These Snickers commercials have been going on for a while and they get worse. They are supposed to be funny but at the same time they are highly offensive. Sexist and stereotypical commercials about how upset guys get when they are hungry is supposedly the equivalent on women "always" being angry/emotional over "small" things. This is just wrong. Sorry, I just realized how sexist the Snickers commercials are.
This topic was mentioned in discussion on Wednesday, and it was something I wanted to focus on for the blog project because of the article of the preschoolers we read for class. This little boy Sam saw these pink zebra print flats at the store and he fell in love with them. Not because they were pink but because they were zebra print and they are his favorite animal. The mother posted his photo wearing the shoes on Facebook to the disagreement of their family. A woman who runs a blog on her website said some words in regards this story that I kind of had a problem with. She had mentioned that if it was up to her she would never allow her little boy to wear pink shoes to school; mentioning that bullying is already bad enough and she would not offer her child up on a silver platter. In my opinion, I just think instead of teaching children "don't get bullied" we should teach them to stand up for themselves and not to bully others. It starts with the children's agents of socialization, primarily the family, and the teachers come second. The earlier one helps the children understand that its not the end of the world for boys to wear pink, maybe more focus can be placed on bigger issues that lie with education. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/11/little-boy-sam-pink-shoes-preschool-photograph_n_2277397.html
In relation to the article, "Becoming a Gendered Body," a certain advertisement for Pantene came to my mind that I saw months ago. Although the ad promotes the Pantene Brand of hair products, it doesn't do so in a way similar to contemporary commercials. The theme of the ad is "Not Sorry," it shows women at home, in the workplace, at the doctors office, and with friends, constantly apologizing for menial social situations. One woman accidentally bumps a mans arm when sitting beside him and says "sorry," another (which resonated more with me) was when a mother apologized for handing her child to her husband to carry. In many ways as women grow up they subconsciously assume that our bodies and our femininity are a source of tentativeness and anxiety whereas in a man's case, its the opposite. A woman should never have to apologize for needing your partners help in raising a child, let alone holding the child. In the article we read we learned a lot about how those social tendencies are solidifies as a child… Especially how teachers typically limit young girls voices more than males, which in the future can limit a woman's mechanism for resisting others' mistreatment of them. I was impressed by the empowered message that Pantene expressed for women: remaining silent or quiet or apologetic is tantamount to endorsing mens supremacy over women.
Here's the ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzL-vdQ3ObA
I agree that Pantene is doing a great thing by having an ad where women stand up for themselves and are unapologetic about it. And I know maybe last year or so there was another ad where they showed male and female CEO's and the male was seen as a good boss, while the female was bossy that was also an ad by Pantene as well. http://youtu.be/B8gz-jxjCmg
I came across an article today that talked about the punishment of the president of the Russian Tennis Federation for calling Serena and Venus Williams "the Williams brothers." I feel like this ties into the discussion of intersectionality within the feminist movement and the importance of taking this into consideration when discussing sexist occurences. Not only do the Williams sisters have to deal with a sexist and transphobic comments about their supposed lack of femininity as women in the sports world, but they also have to deal with the racism that also contribute to such comments due to the fact that they don't fit an ideal standard of white European femininity and beauty. Serena Williams mentions this in her interview with the reporter and I think it's very important to keep her intersectionality when talking about this particular experience.
I agree that the Williams sisters definitely face a lot of discrimination based on color and gender. Though they are both very accomplished tennis players, it seems that more focus is placed on their appearance rather than their skills. Players like Maria Sharapova, who haven't won as many tournaments as the William sisters, earn more money because they fit the standard definition of beauty and get more endorsement deals.
Hello. So, I came across an article about an artist who revamped her husband's car by decorating it with her own sharpie artwork. While the artwork is absolutely stunning and unique, I couldn't help but notice that the writers of the article decided to put the focus on the husband rather than the wife who created the artwork and really brought the car to life. It is titled "Guy Lets His Artist Wife Doodle With Sharpie Pen On His Nissan Skyline GTR". I believe that they could have picked a title that was more acknowledging of the artist's work rather than saying a guy had to "let" her "doodle" on his expensive car; additionally, this title reiterates to us the "importance" of women needing permission from men to express themselves. While this article by no means is a reflection of these individuals' relationship, it still portrays this "importance". The fact that the writer(s) decided on this title somewhat relates to the article we read about how gender is enforced in preschools-- but, this time, the individuals are adults and, even though the woman is performing a relaxed behavior and expressing herself, they must still put her in a light that makes her seem docile.
I see this a lot with women in the art world. It seems that women artists are more likely to be seen as hobbyists and "doodlers", while men are seen as the ones with real talents. As a female and an artist, I want my work to be taken just as seriously as a man who has the same talent as I do.
A few days ago we talked about a little boy wearing "girl" shoes to school. He was not bullied at school but once a picture of him hit Facebook, parents were outraged. I came across a similar story the other day about a little girl who was bullied at school by her peers because she wore "boy" shoes (timberland moccasins). The little girls refused to play with her because of this. She went home and told her mom about this incident and asked her to put her sparkly shoes on so it wouldn't happen again. Apparently, these sparkly shoes are not comfortable for the weather they are in. I find this extremely upsetting because bullying is happening at such a young age over things such as gender. Clothing should not define what gender you are. She wanted to conform to the "norm" in order to not be bullied anymore which stops her from being comfortable and able to express herself. http://reelgirl.com/2013/09/peer-bullying-on-the-rise-when-preschool-girls-wear-boy-shoes/
I too heard and read about the little boy who wore the pink shoes to school. He loves his shoes not because they were pink, but because they were his favorite print, which was zebra. Society has adapted a gender to a lot of things like colors and behavior. If anything brings up question as to why you're doing something or wearing something that another gender would do, you are immediately questioned and judged by many. It is so sad that these mindsets are instilled into children at such a young age by adults.
I am agree with you; clothing should not define what gender you are. I prefer wearing pants, and I know my mother does not like it. She is sort of a typical old-fashioned women, so she thinks pants are for boys and shirts are for girls. I do not think I can make her mind change, so when I have a child, I'll let him/ her choose clothes. I think it is the small step to improve the society adhere stereotype.
I completely agree with you, it's incredibly upsetting to see this starting at such a young age. I believe it is the parents of these children that often plant these ideas of, for example, that boys should wear blue and girls should wear pink, and they pass these ideas down to their children. Quite frankly a child at such a young age doesn't know why they like a certain color, they often say they like it because everybody else said they liked it. If a young girls best friend says her favorite color is pink and she herself doesn't have a favorite color, she too will most likely announce proudly that pink is her favorite color. Children aren't given as much room to express themselves because parents fear that if a young boy likes to play dress up then that might mean he's gay and for whatever reasons, that's not ok with them. Parents are forcing their preconceived notions about gender and what girls should like and what boys should like, upon their kids and when they veer from the norm it becomes a red flag, as if something is wrong with the child.
I realized people in here like talk about their family ethnic background and they talk about it like one of the greetings. I am from Japan and I am undoubtedly 100% a Japanese because my parents are from landlocked country, which means people tend to get marry within neighbor or community and it is hard to think foreigners came long ago. Most of the Japanese is same as my family because Japan is almost a racially homogenous nation, so I have never experienced it and I was very surprised. I feel my family background is boring and I feel envy a little bit, since they are talking about it very proudly. After reading “Reading 15 Optional Ethnicities,” I could understand why they like to talk about their ethnicities and people tend to choose ethnicity deliberately which is affected by the social structure. To be honest, before coming to the U.S., I thought the racial discrimination was over; no longer the American talk about races in a discriminative way and sometimes crazy racists cause some troubles and it is broadcasted. However, it was completely opposite. The American often joke about races, and it seems people enjoy difference at the margin. People are still interested in whether Mariah Carey is White or Black (What Is Singer Mariah Carey's Ethnicity? Black, White Or Mixed Race? 65,000 Fans Want To Know Her Racial Heritage: http://www.arogundade.com/what-ethnicity-and-nationality-is-mariah-careys-black-white-mixed-race-her-heritage-ethnicity-nationality-parents.html ) and even there are a website that introduces celebrities’ ethnicity (EthniCelebs: http://ethnicelebs.com ). Ethnicity does not matter to people’s reputation or characteristic, doesn’t it? The American should know everybody are individual and different because various people live in here. Does this multiracial culture arose people’s curiosity? The American should know you cannot judge people by their family background. The more I expected the U.S. is racial-friendly country, the more I was disappointed. I do not say that is bad, but I am still wondering why people focus on race or ethnicity even now.
I totally agree that you should not judge people based solely on generalizations made about their ethnicity. For many people, their ethnicity really makes up who they are, and they may be proud of their roots and traditions, which is great. I think the problem arises when this pride turns into arrogance about one's race-- I believe it is especially common here in the U.S. since there is such diversity among us everywhere we go, and a few individuals may feel some sort of superiority complex just by seeing others who are different. I know many people who come from all different types of backgrounds who have made insulting remarks about other individuals just based off of their race and generalizations made. I think that's just awful. I also agree when you say that one's ethnicity does not determine one's characteristics. I myself am of mixed race-- however, people still put me into generalizations because of what I appear to be/what they assume I am when most of the accusations aren't true at all. Many people claim, "You are only 'this way' because you are 'this race,'" or, "You are only good at 'this' because you are 'this race,'" when, really, individuals of all different types of backgrounds can be interested in and capable of a wide variety of things! But, I also believe that many people make remarks about others' race just out of curiosity and desiring to expand their knowledge on the matter.
I am Mexican and Spanish and I get told I look American a lot. Racial discrimination is not as bad as it used to be, but it definitely does exist. There are many racial discriminations, just like Tiffany stated, but I choose to not let that affect me. What others say does not affect who I am or who I will be. I also wonder why people put such a giant emphasis on race/ethnicity. Everyone belongs to a race so no one should start judging others because of someone's family roots.
Yeah I agree with all y'all. I am Latina and I can still remember the time I was discriminated in a spelling bee. Some white girls were sitting real close to me and kept staring at me and kept whispering to eachother "look at that Mexican" and well they kept making me faces too. I felt so uncomfortable I kept hearing many things like oh she is never going to win. But in my head I was like whatever. I didn't let it affect me. This happened when I was in 6th grade so I just let it go. It's very true discrimination has settled down and we don't often hear much about discrimination, which is great. Nobody likes to hear that discrimination is still going on.
When reading about self identification in chapter 3, and the focus on micro level identification I thought of Frida Kahlo. Self identification at the mico level is how you see yourself and how you think others around you view you. What you identify with and what you feel most comfortable with. What shapes our identity and how we express ourselves through living through hard times is what helps define. Frida Kahlo often painted self portraits to express how she was feeling and how she felt about herself. She was aware of her emotions and knew on what grounds she stood in terms of her persona. I think that most people see themselves for who they really when they are tested with a critical life event. Though identification is a life long process, all of the experiences you in your left help build who you are and how you see yourself. Frida not only painted her physical appearance, but she also painted her mental self identification. This is something that people don't often do because they are afraid of not fitting into the norms of society and being seen as different.
This article connects to Frederica Y. Daly’s work on how Native American women have to deal with sexism and being dominated over by other men, including nonnative men. Daly notes how Native American men have also started to hold attitudes similar to white individuals when it comes to treating Indian women, and thus, those oppressed are “labeled as identification with the oppressor” (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, 139). This links with how the article notes how 80% of the violence against Native American women are committed by those who are not Native Americans, due to how rapists “view reservations as easy targets” (Campbell & Moore). This is due to how VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) cannot allow the tribal court to persecute a person who is not part of the tribal land if such an incident occurs (Campbell & Moore). Along with many other ethnic-specific problems that Native Americans face in the United States, including the factor of gender creates more problems for Native American women. Additionally, not many people seem to care about the plight of people within this intersectionality of ethnicity and gender.
The article I found involves the marginalization trans students face in traditionally women only colleges, as well as how other women's colleges respond to having trans students enroll. It connects well with Feinberg's "We Are All Works in Prorgess" in that trans people don't fit the Western gender binary. When discussing the gender binary, Feinberg brings up biological determinism (169). This idea can be linked to essentialism. When one is born biologically female or male, they are pushed to be a "real" woman or a "real" man. Since trans students at women's colleges still aren't seen as the "real" gender they identify as, they are seen as "an in-between option" which leads to them being fetishized by both hetero and queer cisgender women. (Padawer). Other colleges take a more exclusive approach where students transitioning from female to male are '“helped to transfer to another institution.'"(Padawer). Biological determinism and essentialism is linked to the gender binary, and trans people face marginalization and hostility because they don't fit into the binary.
In September, the foreign minister of Iceland announced at the UN that Iceland and the Republic of Suriname would be holding a conference on gender equality. However, the only participants at the conference would be men. If this sounds familiar, it’s because the same thing happened on the show Parks and Recreation, to showcase that there is a ton of gender inequality in the government. Now that it’s happening in real life, a lot of people are understandably upset. It doesn’t make much sense to hold a conference on gender equality when only one gender is invited. Another article on the subject (http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/oct/06/men-only-un-conference-gender-equality-if-only-it-was-a-joke) reports that later the organizers said that some women will be involved, but only at certain sessions. This means that most of the attendees will be men, and most of the decisions will be made by men. One argument for this men-only conference is that men are traditionally left out of matters involving feminism and equal rights for all genders, so this could be a good opportunity for men to get involved in the fight for equality. However, it still seems counterintuitive to make decisions on rights for all genders without representation from all genders.
In the video she talks about the "Sam Pepper" incident and how things are finally being done about it. Because you see a while back there was a video Sam posted that showed him violating women in public as one of his prank videos. And some people started having a problem with it being that some of of women from the video did not give their consent to be involved in his prank. And some even went as far as saying that they had been harassed by Sam as well. Through Laci's video she explains how some of the girls attached by Sam's fans so much that they were shamed to silence. A lot of the women went through stages of victim blaming while, Sam was praised for his actions. Laci has posted two videos explaining the whole incident and telling the ways she's trying to fix it. But it's a shame that women get blamed for being victimized while their attackers are praised.
Hello! A few weeks ago I stumbled upon the GQ 2014 men and women of the year winners and while scrolling through the photos of each winner, the different portrayals of the men and women were incredibly clear. Kim Kardashian-West was named this years woman of the year, a woman who's rise to stardom was the result of a leaked sex tape, and naturally her pictures for the magazine depict her as the sex symbol she has come to be. The many male winners, which included Jonah Hill, Pharell, and Colin Firth were also photographed, however their pictures looked much different. The men were depicted as strong; they were dressed in suits and looked serious and well, powerful. Kim on the other hand was naked in several of her photographs, and she was shown smiling and looking playful. This relates to the discussions we've been having in class about the characteristics that men and women are trained to obtain. If we look at the “hidden curriculum” outside of the preschool setting, I believe it applies to many other parts of our lives. It is part of the hidden curriculum to teach women to be fun, light-hearted and gentle and to teach men to be powerful, and serious. However, later on women are pressured to be sexy, feminine and girly because this is what they are trained to think men look for. Whereas men are socialized to believe that they need to be dominant ad tough. Here is the link to Kim's photos as well as an article about her: http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/men-of-the-year/home/moty-2014/kim-kardashian-woman-gq-men-of-the-year-awards-2014 Here is the link to the gallery showing all the male winners: http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/men-of-the-year/home/moty-2014/gq-men-of-the-year-2014-covers-kim-kardashian-and-more/viewgallery/0
Until we had our discussion i honestly didn't notice this but I've begun to see this concept everywhere but especially in magazines. I feel as though women's magazines all tend to emphasize their femininity and show ways to be more delicate while men's magazines all portray ways for men to increase their strength and power both physically as well as either professionally or financially.
So I was skimming through some magazines and I saw something that had to do with the whole concept of sexualizing women. Cosmo had an article on pregnant women's photo-shoots. The article was talking about a new unconventional way to show the beauty of pregnant women and pregnancy as a whole but the article ultimately portrays the image that women must always strive for this "perfect beauty" and that even in pregnancy women have to maintain this level of sexuality. By emphasizing the skimpy bikinis and silky wraps used on the pregnant models the article seems to hold this standard that women are always meant to have sex appeal and that pregnancy is no excuse not to maintain a sexual bodily image. The article only further perpetuated the standard that women must always care about their image and no matter the circumstances they should be able to display and emphasize their sexuality.
I, too, have come across articles that bear the same message. In many of the photos, pregnant women are either being praised or criticized for their fashion choices. Some of the responses would be: "This type of dress does not flatter her baby bump at all." Which raises the question, why should pregnant women - and women in general - be constantly expected to choose clothing that "flatters" their body? As you mentioned, it just perpetuates the notion that women are mere fashion icons, that they are nothing more than their appearance.
I recently read an article about a comedian named Sarah Silverman and a video she recently published that confronts the wage gap between men and women. After watching the video and hearing some of the facts about how women only earned 78.3 cents to every dollar that men earned in the last year, it reminded me of what professor Craig mentioned in one of the last lectures about the wage gap between men and women and how they stated similar points. Silverman's "solution" to this in her skit was to get a sex change as it would be a cheaper solution to the money she would loose over the course of her career because she is a woman. The video is basically a pitch for people to support the National Women's Law Center which fights for equal pay legislation. Silverman brings light to the wage gap and advocates for support towards it in a humorous way, showing how much the combined loss this adds up to for all working women. Even though she is advocating equal pay, the video could be construed by some as offensive to transgender community by the way she acts like a sex change is not a big deal and choosing your gender is optional, but I believe her overall point of the wage gap is the main focus and that the video was a good way to bring attention to the situation that women are not compensated equally for their work when compared to white men. African-American women also earn less at 64 cents to the dollar while Hispanic women earned 56 cents to the white mans dollar, illustrating intersectionality between gender and race and how white men are given more opportunities to become successful in society as compared to those of other races who are not privaledged. Differences in jobs and experiences, however, are not discussed and taken into account as the statistics are based on the combined yearly earnings of all work fields for both genders. Here is a link to the article and video http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/08/sarah-silverman-wage-gap-equal-paycheck-project_n_5953684.html
A few days ago, I came upon a picture that said, "Save the Boobies, not the Women". Finding this rather intriguing, I googled the phrase and decided to read the first article that popped up. In this article, the author Lisa His, describes her experience when she posted the phrase " No More 'Save The Ta-Tas' Please!" on Facebook. Immediately, she claims she was swarmed by "put-upon" guys who told her to stop whining, and that "sexism makes the world go round." I find this very frustrating because in this modern day and age - even when it comes to a life and death situation such as breast cancer - women's bodies are still being sexualized. Nevermind the fact that this person is going through an incredibly tough time and has to deal with this severe disease on a daily basis - we must save the breasts. This common train of thought is barbaric at the very least, and dehumanizes the survivors who no longer have breasts and/or have scars. It makes them feel inferior and less of a woman. Furthermore, she also mentions that some of the males argued that by going with this approach - "sex sells" - more and more funding is going towards breast cancer research; in their eyes, we should be happy that women are being objectified, because it is worth it in the long run. However, this dehumanizing and belittling act of arrogance proves just how progress is being made in terms of gender inequality.
It’s amazing what some people will actually say, isn’t it? “Sexism makes the world go round”… Just like the Save the Ta-Tas campaign, it’s an example of not taking a real issue seriously. And when someone does that, there is an immediate barrier to discussion, argument, and progress. Do you wonder if these guys would actually say those things in person? I would guess not, but the facebook surge of responses shows there is an undercurrent of these overtly sexist sentiments. I think what may make it easier for people to belittle such a serious disease is the nature of the breast cancer campaigns themselves. When you think of breast cancer, often it is the images of pink shirts and rubber bracelets that come to mind, not real people suffering. Even the disease is objectified!
I came upon this article that a friend had re-posted about rape culture at UC Davis, as tracked by number of sexual assaults reported. It shared the stories of several women who were victims of rape, involving other UC Davis students. Some women tried to seek justice through the campus Student Judicial Affairs, but found the process extremely bureaucratic, making a painful process even worse. Others found support through the Campus Violence Prevention Program, while others felt they were on their own. This article came as harsh reality check for me, since I have always felt very safe in Davis. This is not the case, however, for women who have endured sexual assault and harassment- many more than the reported incidents would suggest. Also disappointing was the response of some administrators and staff to reports of rape, who gave responses like “guys are like that” and “be more aware of your surroundings next time”. It is nonchalance like this that allows the rape culture at UC Davis to persist. Although the reality of a rape culture may be an unpleasant wake-up to some, it is an important one.
Hello,
ReplyDeleteI have read an article that illustrates two components of what we have discussed in lecture as well as from the reading assigned this week. The article is from NPR called "Can Children Know, At Age 2, They Were Born With The 'Wrong Sex'" by Barabara J. King. This article describes a toddler, Kathryn, who since the age of two has identified herself as a boy. Her parents had originally thought this declaration was only a sign she was going through her "tomboy" phase. By the age of four, Kathryn's parents had accepted the reality that this was not a tomboy phase, but a true identification of gender. Upon Kathryn's instance, her parents "let her live as a boy." Kathryn began wearing clothing that marked her as a boy and changed her name to Tyler. This case poses several questions we had discussed in class including whether gender is determined by biological determinism or social constructionism. In this case, gender has been determined by both of these ideologies. When Kathryn was born, she was identified as a female because of the belief in biological determinism. However, once Kathryn became more aware of her cultural environment, she was able to voice and choose her own gender identity. By dressing "as a boy" and changing her name to a more masculine name, Tyler, she re-determined her gender identity through social constructionism. The notion of what clothes and names were appropriate for a boy, were determined and shaped by society's designation of gender roles, and thus applied to Tyler in order to reshape his gender identity. Though Tyler had made the decision himself to identify his own gender, he still followed the set gender roles that had been determined by society in order to mark his gender. For further reference: http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2012/05/24/153285061/can-children-know-at-age-2-they-were-born-the-wrong-sex
Beginning to read chapter 3, the text in one section in particular about "home" resonated with me a lot. The author writes " Home may be a geographic, social, emotional, and spiritual space where we hope to find safety, security, familiarity, continuity, acceptance, love, and understanding, and where we can feel and be our best, whole selves. Home may be in several places at once or in different places at different times of our lives." After reading this I had a very positive emotional response thinking of all the places where I have a home, such as at my parents house, out in the wilderness, or even here in Davis. Furthermore, it's interesting to think about how the places I consider to be home, or have considered to be home in the past, have intersected with my personal identities by helping shape them. Where is your home?
ReplyDeleteMy home is wherever I feel comfortable. Davis is my new home! I agree with you about how places I consider to be my home helped shape my identity. Davis has helped me become independent and more productive with my school work. I miss the home I have always known, but Davis has strengthened my identity in a positive way.
DeleteWhen the author writes "Home may be in several places at once", I can relate to this since I am from out of state. Davis is one of my homes. So is downtown Seattle, Wailuku, and the planes that take me between homes. All these places are where I feel free, confident, and purely myself. I agree with Ashley on how Davis can help one become independent. However, I'd like to add that some homes influence a person more than others. Since coming to Davis, I identify with more communities than I did back in Seattle and express myself in ways I never considered. So far Davis has made the biggest impact on me.
DeleteI like how the author writes that "home may be in several places at once or in different places at different times of out lives". I fall into the category of the latter statement as I have lived in different countries and cities throughout my life which I believe have all had an effect in shaping who I am today and what i consider home. As with you, I see Davis as one of my homes, but ultimately home(s) for me are anywhere where i have family and friends and where i feel most comfortable.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBecoming a Gendered Body reminded me of another article in TIME magazine that I read a few months ago about a gender neutral school in Sweden. In this school, they actively try to remove the "hidden curriculum". For example, they teach emotions by using sexless dolls. Sweden as a whole has been very pro feminism, even creating a new neutral pronoun. This has benefited women as political representation is nearly even, as is in the workplace, and with fathers taking more childcare responsibility. I think this is really interesting to see because so much of society has been defined by the gender binary. How would it look without it? And how would it affect other discrimination? This would definitely change how people identify each other and themselves, but hopefully it will allow more people to have more opportunities and choices in their lives.
ReplyDelete(forgot to add the link: http://www.readington.k12.nj.us/cms/lib07/NJ01000244/Centricity/Domain/109/Boys%20Wont%20Be%20Boys.pdf)
Hiya, I just wanted to share a Snicker commerical link
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW6ZXHWvaGc
These commercials have never really caught my attention but now taking another look at them they have a real act for going against attitudes that are usually placed on women who are deemed to act undesirably or as a nuisance by social standards. This can relate to the curriculum that is expected of women who are expected to act as docile and with no complaint that we read in the article assigned this past week. Anyone else ever find media examples like this?
I agree with you on a lot of different levels, I have seen this commercial various times and it never necessarily resonated with me as offensive or sexist. But after being in this class for a mere 3 weeks and analyzing the way women are viewed in the media I can see how this ad could be controversial. The fact that of all examples, they use a woman to be the "crabby, upset, complaining, diva." Although the two women they used are iconic actors, why couldn't they have painted them in a more positive light? Why do they subconsciously send the message over national TV that women are irritable? And I also found the ending, where all the other men in the car were relieved when the woman ate the snickers and turned back into a man upsetting as well. I think this was a great example of social media skewing gender roles
DeleteWhile this advertisement does not have much to do with your example, I was reminded of this billboard ad after you posted your video link:
Deletehttp://www.engadget.com/2006/07/06/sony-under-fire-for-racist-advertising/
Sony's ad for the Ceramic White PSP released within Holland has drawn ire for its representation of racial skin tones. From what I have learned in my AMS021 class previously, this sense of standing out and being dominant comes from how soap was used during colonization in order to "civilize" indigenous people and to assimilate them into a soon-to-be dominant civilization through imperialism. This ad still portrays the legacies of racism. It also contrasts with the work antiracial feminism performs, which fights "against white supremacy and imperialism," according to Becky Thompson (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, 35). Such a representation of racial skin tones and women remains problematic to this day.
I totally agree with you and actually Snickers is pretty guilty of putting out a lot of sexist ads that encourage misogyny. There was even recently an Australian Snickers ad about "what construction workers do when they're 'not themselves'"
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqgjTZQiySw
Instead of catcalling and harassing women, these men are giving genuine compliments and shouting their support for gender equality, which is sort of sad considering the message at the end of the ad is "you're not you when you're hungry."
I also agree with you. These Snickers commercials have been going on for a while and they get worse. They are supposed to be funny but at the same time they are highly offensive. Sexist and stereotypical commercials about how upset guys get when they are hungry is supposedly the equivalent on women "always" being angry/emotional over "small" things. This is just wrong. Sorry, I just realized how sexist the Snickers commercials are.
DeleteThis topic was mentioned in discussion on Wednesday, and it was something I wanted to focus on for the blog project because of the article of the preschoolers we read for class. This little boy Sam saw these pink zebra print flats at the store and he fell in love with them. Not because they were pink but because they were zebra print and they are his favorite animal. The mother posted his photo wearing the shoes on Facebook to the disagreement of their family. A woman who runs a blog on her website said some words in regards this story that I kind of had a problem with. She had mentioned that if it was up to her she would never allow her little boy to wear pink shoes to school; mentioning that bullying is already bad enough and she would not offer her child up on a silver platter.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I just think instead of teaching children "don't get bullied" we should teach them to stand up for themselves and not to bully others. It starts with the children's agents of socialization, primarily the family, and the teachers come second. The earlier one helps the children understand that its not the end of the world for boys to wear pink, maybe more focus can be placed on bigger issues that lie with education.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/11/little-boy-sam-pink-shoes-preschool-photograph_n_2277397.html
In relation to the article, "Becoming a Gendered Body," a certain advertisement for Pantene came to my mind that I saw months ago. Although the ad promotes the Pantene Brand of hair products, it doesn't do so in a way similar to contemporary commercials. The theme of the ad is "Not Sorry," it shows women at home, in the workplace, at the doctors office, and with friends, constantly apologizing for menial social situations. One woman accidentally bumps a mans arm when sitting beside him and says "sorry," another (which resonated more with me) was when a mother apologized for handing her child to her husband to carry. In many ways as women grow up they subconsciously assume that our bodies and our femininity are a source of tentativeness and anxiety whereas in a man's case, its the opposite. A woman should never have to apologize for needing your partners help in raising a child, let alone holding the child. In the article we read we learned a lot about how those social tendencies are solidifies as a child… Especially how teachers typically limit young girls voices more than males, which in the future can limit a woman's mechanism for resisting others' mistreatment of them. I was impressed by the empowered message that Pantene expressed for women: remaining silent or quiet or apologetic is tantamount to endorsing mens supremacy over women.
ReplyDeleteHere's the ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzL-vdQ3ObA
I agree that Pantene is doing a great thing by having an ad where women stand up for themselves and are unapologetic about it. And I know maybe last year or so there was another ad where they showed male and female CEO's and the male was seen as a good boss, while the female was bossy that was also an ad by Pantene as well. http://youtu.be/B8gz-jxjCmg
DeleteI came across an article today that talked about the punishment of the president of the Russian Tennis Federation for calling Serena and Venus Williams "the Williams brothers." I feel like this ties into the discussion of intersectionality within the feminist movement and the importance of taking this into consideration when discussing sexist occurences. Not only do the Williams sisters have to deal with a sexist and transphobic comments about their supposed lack of femininity as women in the sports world, but they also have to deal with the racism that also contribute to such comments due to the fact that they don't fit an ideal standard of white European femininity and beauty. Serena Williams mentions this in her interview with the reporter and I think it's very important to keep her intersectionality when talking about this particular experience.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/20/sports/tennis/williams-and-sharapova-blast-russian-for-sexist-remarks.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=fb-nytimes&bicmst=1409232722000&bicmet=1419773522000&smtyp=aut&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&_r=0
I agree that the Williams sisters definitely face a lot of discrimination based on color and gender. Though they are both very accomplished tennis players, it seems that more focus is placed on their appearance rather than their skills. Players like Maria Sharapova, who haven't won as many tournaments as the William sisters, earn more money because they fit the standard definition of beauty and get more endorsement deals.
DeleteHello.
ReplyDeleteSo, I came across an article about an artist who revamped her husband's car by decorating it with her own sharpie artwork. While the artwork is absolutely stunning and unique, I couldn't help but notice that the writers of the article decided to put the focus on the husband rather than the wife who created the artwork and really brought the car to life. It is titled "Guy Lets His Artist Wife Doodle With Sharpie Pen On His Nissan Skyline GTR". I believe that they could have picked a title that was more acknowledging of the artist's work rather than saying a guy had to "let" her "doodle" on his expensive car; additionally, this title reiterates to us the "importance" of women needing permission from men to express themselves. While this article by no means is a reflection of these individuals' relationship, it still portrays this "importance". The fact that the writer(s) decided on this title somewhat relates to the article we read about how gender is enforced in preschools-- but, this time, the individuals are adults and, even though the woman is performing a relaxed behavior and expressing herself, they must still put her in a light that makes her seem docile.
http://www.boredpanda.com/car-art-sharpie-pen-drawing/
I see this a lot with women in the art world. It seems that women artists are more likely to be seen as hobbyists and "doodlers", while men are seen as the ones with real talents. As a female and an artist, I want my work to be taken just as seriously as a man who has the same talent as I do.
DeleteA few days ago we talked about a little boy wearing "girl" shoes to school. He was not bullied at school but once a picture of him hit Facebook, parents were outraged. I came across a similar story the other day about a little girl who was bullied at school by her peers because she wore "boy" shoes (timberland moccasins). The little girls refused to play with her because of this. She went home and told her mom about this incident and asked her to put her sparkly shoes on so it wouldn't happen again. Apparently, these sparkly shoes are not comfortable for the weather they are in. I find this extremely upsetting because bullying is happening at such a young age over things such as gender. Clothing should not define what gender you are. She wanted to conform to the "norm" in order to not be bullied anymore which stops her from being comfortable and able to express herself.
ReplyDeletehttp://reelgirl.com/2013/09/peer-bullying-on-the-rise-when-preschool-girls-wear-boy-shoes/
I too heard and read about the little boy who wore the pink shoes to school. He loves his shoes not because they were pink, but because they were his favorite print, which was zebra. Society has adapted a gender to a lot of things like colors and behavior. If anything brings up question as to why you're doing something or wearing something that another gender would do, you are immediately questioned and judged by many. It is so sad that these mindsets are instilled into children at such a young age by adults.
DeleteI am agree with you; clothing should not define what gender you are. I prefer wearing pants, and I know my mother does not like it. She is sort of a typical old-fashioned women, so she thinks pants are for boys and shirts are for girls. I do not think I can make her mind change, so when I have a child, I'll let him/ her choose clothes. I think it is the small step to improve the society adhere stereotype.
DeleteI completely agree with you, it's incredibly upsetting to see this starting at such a young age. I believe it is the parents of these children that often plant these ideas of, for example, that boys should wear blue and girls should wear pink, and they pass these ideas down to their children. Quite frankly a child at such a young age doesn't know why they like a certain color, they often say they like it because everybody else said they liked it. If a young girls best friend says her favorite color is pink and she herself doesn't have a favorite color, she too will most likely announce proudly that pink is her favorite color. Children aren't given as much room to express themselves because parents fear that if a young boy likes to play dress up then that might mean he's gay and for whatever reasons, that's not ok with them. Parents are forcing their preconceived notions about gender and what girls should like and what boys should like, upon their kids and when they veer from the norm it becomes a red flag, as if something is wrong with the child.
DeleteI realized people in here like talk about their family ethnic background and they talk about it like one of the greetings. I am from Japan and I am undoubtedly 100% a Japanese because my parents are from landlocked country, which means people tend to get marry within neighbor or community and it is hard to think foreigners came long ago. Most of the Japanese is same as my family because Japan is almost a racially homogenous nation, so I have never experienced it and I was very surprised. I feel my family background is boring and I feel envy a little bit, since they are talking about it very proudly. After reading “Reading 15 Optional Ethnicities,” I could understand why they like to talk about their ethnicities and people tend to choose ethnicity deliberately which is affected by the social structure.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, before coming to the U.S., I thought the racial discrimination was over; no longer the American talk about races in a discriminative way and sometimes crazy racists cause some troubles and it is broadcasted. However, it was completely opposite. The American often joke about races, and it seems people enjoy difference at the margin. People are still interested in whether Mariah Carey is White or Black (What Is Singer Mariah Carey's Ethnicity? Black, White Or Mixed Race? 65,000 Fans Want To Know Her Racial Heritage: http://www.arogundade.com/what-ethnicity-and-nationality-is-mariah-careys-black-white-mixed-race-her-heritage-ethnicity-nationality-parents.html ) and even there are a website that introduces celebrities’ ethnicity (EthniCelebs: http://ethnicelebs.com ). Ethnicity does not matter to people’s reputation or characteristic, doesn’t it? The American should know everybody are individual and different because various people live in here. Does this multiracial culture arose people’s curiosity? The American should know you cannot judge people by their family background. The more I expected the U.S. is racial-friendly country, the more I was disappointed. I do not say that is bad, but I am still wondering why people focus on race or ethnicity even now.
I totally agree that you should not judge people based solely on generalizations made about their ethnicity.
DeleteFor many people, their ethnicity really makes up who they are, and they may be proud of their roots and traditions, which is great. I think the problem arises when this pride turns into arrogance about one's race-- I believe it is especially common here in the U.S. since there is such diversity among us everywhere we go, and a few individuals may feel some sort of superiority complex just by seeing others who are different. I know many people who come from all different types of backgrounds who have made insulting remarks about other individuals just based off of their race and generalizations made. I think that's just awful.
I also agree when you say that one's ethnicity does not determine one's characteristics. I myself am of mixed race-- however, people still put me into generalizations because of what I appear to be/what they assume I am when most of the accusations aren't true at all. Many people claim, "You are only 'this way' because you are 'this race,'" or, "You are only good at 'this' because you are 'this race,'" when, really, individuals of all different types of backgrounds can be interested in and capable of a wide variety of things!
But, I also believe that many people make remarks about others' race just out of curiosity and desiring to expand their knowledge on the matter.
I am Mexican and Spanish and I get told I look American a lot. Racial discrimination is not as bad as it used to be, but it definitely does exist. There are many racial discriminations, just like Tiffany stated, but I choose to not let that affect me. What others say does not affect who I am or who I will be. I also wonder why people put such a giant emphasis on race/ethnicity. Everyone belongs to a race so no one should start judging others because of someone's family roots.
DeleteYeah I agree with all y'all. I am Latina and I can still remember the time I was discriminated in a spelling bee. Some white girls were sitting real close to me and kept staring at me and kept whispering to eachother "look at that Mexican" and well they kept making me faces too. I felt so uncomfortable I kept hearing many things like oh she is never going to win. But in my head I was like whatever. I didn't let it affect me. This happened when I was in 6th grade so I just let it go. It's very true discrimination has settled down and we don't often hear much about discrimination, which is great. Nobody likes to hear that discrimination is still going on.
Deletehttp://www.artyfactory.com/art_appreciation/portraits/frida_kahlo.htm
ReplyDeleteWhen reading about self identification in chapter 3, and the focus on micro level identification I thought of Frida Kahlo. Self identification at the mico level is how you see yourself and how you think others around you view you. What you identify with and what you feel most comfortable with. What shapes our identity and how we express ourselves through living through hard times is what helps define. Frida Kahlo often painted self portraits to express how she was feeling and how she felt about herself. She was aware of her emotions and knew on what grounds she stood in terms of her persona. I think that most people see themselves for who they really when they are tested with a critical life event. Though identification is a life long process, all of the experiences you in your left help build who you are and how you see yourself. Frida not only painted her physical appearance, but she also painted her mental self identification. This is something that people don't often do because they are afraid of not fitting into the norms of society and being seen as different.
While browsing around the internet, I found this blog post discussing a problem Native American women are facing with the reservation system.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/ryan-campbell/immigrant-women-native-american-women-and-rape_b_5965998.html?utm_hp_ref=immigrants
This article connects to Frederica Y. Daly’s work on how Native American women have to deal with sexism and being dominated over by other men, including nonnative men. Daly notes how Native American men have also started to hold attitudes similar to white individuals when it comes to treating Indian women, and thus, those oppressed are “labeled as identification with the oppressor” (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, 139). This links with how the article notes how 80% of the violence against Native American women are committed by those who are not Native Americans, due to how rapists “view reservations as easy targets” (Campbell & Moore). This is due to how VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) cannot allow the tribal court to persecute a person who is not part of the tribal land if such an incident occurs (Campbell & Moore). Along with many other ethnic-specific problems that Native Americans face in the United States, including the factor of gender creates more problems for Native American women. Additionally, not many people seem to care about the plight of people within this intersectionality of ethnicity and gender.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/magazine/when-women-become-men-at-wellesley-college.html?_r=3
ReplyDeleteThe article I found involves the marginalization trans students face in traditionally women only colleges, as well as how other women's colleges respond to having trans students enroll. It connects well with Feinberg's "We Are All Works in Prorgess" in that trans people don't fit the Western gender binary. When discussing the gender binary, Feinberg brings up biological determinism (169). This idea can be linked to essentialism. When one is born biologically female or male, they are pushed to be a "real" woman or a "real" man. Since trans students at women's colleges still aren't seen as the "real" gender they identify as, they are seen as "an in-between option" which leads to them being fetishized by both hetero and queer cisgender women. (Padawer). Other colleges take a more exclusive approach where students transitioning from female to male are '“helped to transfer to another institution.'"(Padawer). Biological determinism and essentialism is linked to the gender binary, and trans people face marginalization and hostility because they don't fit into the binary.
I came across this story a few ago and thought it would be relevant to our discussion.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/09/29/352541250/at-u-n-iceland-announces-men-only-conference-on-gender-equality
In September, the foreign minister of Iceland announced at the UN that Iceland and the Republic of Suriname would be holding a conference on gender equality. However, the only participants at the conference would be men. If this sounds familiar, it’s because the same thing happened on the show Parks and Recreation, to showcase that there is a ton of gender inequality in the government. Now that it’s happening in real life, a lot of people are understandably upset. It doesn’t make much sense to hold a conference on gender equality when only one gender is invited.
Another article on the subject (http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/oct/06/men-only-un-conference-gender-equality-if-only-it-was-a-joke) reports that later the organizers said that some women will be involved, but only at certain sessions. This means that most of the attendees will be men, and most of the decisions will be made by men.
One argument for this men-only conference is that men are traditionally left out of matters involving feminism and equal rights for all genders, so this could be a good opportunity for men to get involved in the fight for equality. However, it still seems counterintuitive to make decisions on rights for all genders without representation from all genders.
A few days ago I was scrolling through my YouTube feed and I saw two new videos by laci green.
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/r9qVaMhnJB8
http://youtu.be/2_9sZ2sL6jA
In the video she talks about the "Sam Pepper" incident and how things are finally being done about it. Because you see a while back there was a video Sam posted that showed him violating women in public as one of his prank videos. And some people started having a problem with it being that some of of women from the video did not give their consent to be involved in his prank. And some even went as far as saying that they had been harassed by Sam as well. Through Laci's video she explains how some of the girls attached by Sam's fans so much that they were shamed to silence. A lot of the women went through stages of victim blaming while, Sam was praised for his actions. Laci has posted two videos explaining the whole incident and telling the ways she's trying to fix it. But it's a shame that women get blamed for being victimized while their attackers are praised.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHello! A few weeks ago I stumbled upon the GQ 2014 men and women of the year winners and while scrolling through the photos of each winner, the different portrayals of the men and women were incredibly clear. Kim Kardashian-West was named this years woman of the year, a woman who's rise to stardom was the result of a leaked sex tape, and naturally her pictures for the magazine depict her as the sex symbol she has come to be. The many male winners, which included Jonah Hill, Pharell, and Colin Firth were also photographed, however their pictures looked much different. The men were depicted as strong; they were dressed in suits and looked serious and well, powerful. Kim on the other hand was naked in several of her photographs, and she was shown smiling and looking playful. This relates to the discussions we've been having in class about the characteristics that men and women are trained to obtain. If we look at the “hidden curriculum” outside of the preschool setting, I believe it applies to many other parts of our lives. It is part of the hidden curriculum to teach women to be fun, light-hearted and gentle and to teach men to be powerful, and serious. However, later on women are pressured to be sexy, feminine and girly because this is what they are trained to think men look for. Whereas men are socialized to believe that they need to be dominant ad tough.
ReplyDeleteHere is the link to Kim's photos as well as an article about her: http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/men-of-the-year/home/moty-2014/kim-kardashian-woman-gq-men-of-the-year-awards-2014
Here is the link to the gallery showing all the male winners: http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/men-of-the-year/home/moty-2014/gq-men-of-the-year-2014-covers-kim-kardashian-and-more/viewgallery/0
Until we had our discussion i honestly didn't notice this but I've begun to see this concept everywhere but especially in magazines. I feel as though women's magazines all tend to emphasize their femininity and show ways to be more delicate while men's magazines all portray ways for men to increase their strength and power both physically as well as either professionally or financially.
DeleteSo I was skimming through some magazines and I saw something that had to do with the whole concept of sexualizing women. Cosmo had an article on pregnant women's photo-shoots. The article was talking about a new unconventional way to show the beauty of pregnant women and pregnancy as a whole but the article ultimately portrays the image that women must always strive for this "perfect beauty" and that even in pregnancy women have to maintain this level of sexuality. By emphasizing the skimpy bikinis and silky wraps used on the pregnant models the article seems to hold this standard that women are always meant to have sex appeal and that pregnancy is no excuse not to maintain a sexual bodily image. The article only further perpetuated the standard that women must always care about their image and no matter the circumstances they should be able to display and emphasize their sexuality.
ReplyDeleteI, too, have come across articles that bear the same message. In many of the photos, pregnant women are either being praised or criticized for their fashion choices. Some of the responses would be: "This type of dress does not flatter her baby bump at all." Which raises the question, why should pregnant women - and women in general - be constantly expected to choose clothing that "flatters" their body? As you mentioned, it just perpetuates the notion that women are mere fashion icons, that they are nothing more than their appearance.
DeleteI recently read an article about a comedian named Sarah Silverman and a video she recently published that confronts the wage gap between men and women. After watching the video and hearing some of the facts about how women only earned 78.3 cents to every dollar that men earned in the last year, it reminded me of what professor Craig mentioned in one of the last lectures about the wage gap between men and women and how they stated similar points. Silverman's "solution" to this in her skit was to get a sex change as it would be a cheaper solution to the money she would loose over the course of her career because she is a woman. The video is basically a pitch for people to support the National Women's Law Center which fights for equal pay legislation. Silverman brings light to the wage gap and advocates for support towards it in a humorous way, showing how much the combined loss this adds up to for all working women. Even though she is advocating equal pay, the video could be construed by some as offensive to transgender community by the way she acts like a sex change is not a big deal and choosing your gender is optional, but I believe her overall point of the wage gap is the main focus and that the video was a good way to bring attention to the situation that women are not compensated equally for their work when compared to white men. African-American women also earn less at 64 cents to the dollar while Hispanic women earned 56 cents to the white mans dollar, illustrating intersectionality between gender and race and how white men are given more opportunities to become successful in society as compared to those of other races who are not privaledged. Differences in jobs and experiences, however, are not discussed and taken into account as the statistics are based on the combined yearly earnings of all work fields for both genders. Here is a link to the article and video http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/08/sarah-silverman-wage-gap-equal-paycheck-project_n_5953684.html
ReplyDeleteA few days ago, I came upon a picture that said, "Save the Boobies, not the Women". Finding this rather intriguing, I googled the phrase and decided to read the first article that popped up. In this article, the author Lisa His, describes her experience when she posted the phrase " No More 'Save The Ta-Tas' Please!" on Facebook. Immediately, she claims she was swarmed by "put-upon" guys who told her to stop whining, and that "sexism makes the world go round." I find this very frustrating because in this modern day and age - even when it comes to a life and death situation such as breast cancer - women's bodies are still being sexualized. Nevermind the fact that this person is going through an incredibly tough time and has to deal with this severe disease on a daily basis - we must save the breasts. This common train of thought is barbaric at the very least, and dehumanizes the survivors who no longer have breasts and/or have scars. It makes them feel inferior and less of a woman. Furthermore, she also mentions that some of the males argued that by going with this approach - "sex sells" - more and more funding is going towards breast cancer research; in their eyes, we should be happy that women are being objectified, because it is worth it in the long run. However, this dehumanizing and belittling act of arrogance proves just how progress is being made in terms of gender inequality.
ReplyDeleteIt’s amazing what some people will actually say, isn’t it? “Sexism makes the world go round”… Just like the Save the Ta-Tas campaign, it’s an example of not taking a real issue seriously. And when someone does that, there is an immediate barrier to discussion, argument, and progress. Do you wonder if these guys would actually say those things in person? I would guess not, but the facebook surge of responses shows there is an undercurrent of these overtly sexist sentiments. I think what may make it easier for people to belittle such a serious disease is the nature of the breast cancer campaigns themselves. When you think of breast cancer, often it is the images of pink shirts and rubber bracelets that come to mind, not real people suffering. Even the disease is objectified!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/does-uc-davis-have-a/content?oid=15220467
ReplyDeleteI came upon this article that a friend had re-posted about rape culture at UC Davis, as tracked by number of sexual assaults reported. It shared the stories of several women who were victims of rape, involving other UC Davis students. Some women tried to seek justice through the campus Student Judicial Affairs, but found the process extremely bureaucratic, making a painful process even worse. Others found support through the Campus Violence Prevention Program, while others felt they were on their own. This article came as harsh reality check for me, since I have always felt very safe in Davis. This is not the case, however, for women who have endured sexual assault and harassment- many more than the reported incidents would suggest. Also disappointing was the response of some administrators and staff to reports of rape, who gave responses like “guys are like that” and “be more aware of your surroundings next time”. It is nonchalance like this that allows the rape culture at UC Davis to persist. Although the reality of a rape culture may be an unpleasant wake-up to some, it is an important one.