This article relates closely to our conversation in discussion section about racist and insensitive Halloween costumes. The events in the article happened this fall at the University of Chicago. This Halloween, a number of students at the university dressed in costumes stereotyping Mexicans. In response, Victor Perez and other students sent a letter to the university and created a Change.org petition calling for greater cultural diversity and sensitivity on campus. Afterwards, an anonymous facebook post threatened Perez for his activism, leading to an investigation by campus officials and federal authorities. The university has released statements in sympathy with members of the university who have experienced discrimination, but students like Perez remain unsatisfied with the university’s lukewarm response. Students responded by holding a demonstration on campus to bring attention to the need for greater cultural diversity, especially for students of color. What I find most troubling about the University of Chicago’s response to student activists is their focus on the facebook threat, instead of deeper roots of discrimination and intolerance on the campus. By doing this, UChicago officials are avoiding admitting larger problems in the university community. The incident parallels the UC Davis CoHo sit-in protests a couple years ago, when students reacted against a “Mexican themed” party hosted by student employees of the CoHo.
Its really frustrating to hear about colleges all over the country having parties that mock students of color and have the colleges do nothing about it. All over there have been reports about college students throwing parties that discriminate against their peers, yet the colleges fail to do anything to stop it from happening again and again.Colleges really need to do something to stop their students to lessen the cultural gap to put an end to these attacks on people of color through the forms of parties.
So, I decided to go Black Friday shopping this Thanksgiving evening, and I would like to share what happened to me during my attempt to make a purchase and its relation to reinforcing the gender binary.
In the first store I decided to go into, I found a shirt that I wanted, but the sale only applied if you buy 2 or more items. I didn't find anything else I wanted, thus I asked my friend to buy my shirt with his 2 items so I could also get the discount. However, we were not able to complete the transaction due to the policy of the sale which was that you cannot mix items of "different gender" for the promotion to be applied. I asked the cashier why this was, and he said it was just the policy and that even he thought it was "stupid" and did not understand why they would implement it. I was pretty aggravated that I was not able to purchase my item (I was definitely not paying full price for it), but this circumstance demonstrated another way that gender separation is reinforced: through retail corporations. The separation is apparent when walking into a store; if the store offers clothing for both genders, there is a distinct boundary separating the men's and women's sides. However, furthering the gender binary through sales that forced individuals to purchase items within these same gendered categories was something I did not expect. At the end of the day, it is just clothing that an individual can wear regardless of whether they identify with that gender. In the store, the policy of the sale was not apparent, even when I read the fine print. When I went online the next morning, I saw that this policy was reinforced online as well, specifically stating in the fine print that "discounted items must be of the same gender." I do not understand why they would implement this policy as it can decrease sales when individuals are trying to buy gifts, when someone finds an item on the "other side" that they would also like or when people are buying merchandise together (i.e. in my situation).
Thank you for sharing your story. I think that the discount rule is absolutely ridiculous for many reasons. First off people should not be restricted to buying clothing of whatever gender they chose. Everyone is free to dress as they please. Another thing that I thought of is that this discount rule also not very well thought out, because many people shop for other people over the holidays. This will ultimately be problematic if you are trying to buy something for different gendered people. I would be discouraged of even shopping for that sale because of the sexist rule. As a clothing store that is ultimately trying to make money, they should know that the sale would be much more successful is they did not apply a sexist rule. There is a lot of sexism when it comes to clothing and clothing stores.
I've never heard of a store policy that restricts customers from buying items or receiving discounts because of the gender of the clothing. This seems like something that should/ would be illegal. It's odd that the store would even hold this policy, especially during the holiday season. I'm sure many customers were probably angered by this policy, and most likely caused the lines at the store to slow. Overall, this policy is plain discriminatory, and probably caused the company more trouble than they wanted.
Wow that's infuriating. Because it would be absolutely ridiculous for a girl to want to buy what is considered a male shirt as well as a woman's pair of jeans, right? It seems like ignorance rather than a disregard for transgenders, but nonetheless it is unacceptable for a store to have such policies in todays society. Its that sort of ignorance and lack of attention to detail that drives customers away, and therefore results in a decrease in business, and then profits, which is what these companies care about most of course, so it actually is very surprising that they would have such a rule in place.
I found this to be so dumb. I know I personally like to buy male shirts and buy a skirt to go with it. So this means I would not be able to buy it discounted because one is intended for males and the other for females? I am so sorry you had to go through this discrimination and sexism. It is so wrong to have this sort of sale because if you want to buy something for your brother and another for your sister, you will not be able to get the discount because of the gender binary. This just doesn't make any sense.
This week I found an article on a 15-year-old Chinese girl who was adopted and raised by two white American parents. In the article Emily Champion speaks of her experience growing up in the United States, not only as a Chinese student in a predominantly white neighborhood and school, but also as a young girl who was born with a cleft palate. She recalled experiences at school where children would mock the way she spoke, as she stated “many people thought my speech wasn’t clear because I was Chinese, not because of my cleft palate.”
Because she had been adopted when she was only 4 years old, she did not know Mandarin. When her classmates would ask her, “Do you speak Chinese?” she stated it would “immediately make me feel bad about myself and feel ashamed because I don’t speak Mandarin.” Many of her classmates would mimic the Chinese language whenever they were around her, assuming she knew Mandarin solely because she was Chinese.
She recalled growing up in America, being stuck between two cultures, and not fully knowing how to speak Chinese or English. Because her cleft palate restricted her ability to speak and reach in English, she often felt as though she was not intelligent, even though she knew she was intelligent. Individuals around her often told her that she “should be smart ‘because I’m Asian.’”
This article was similar to the section within chapter 8 on Transnational Adoptions. Both the article and the text within the book bring about points on the difficulties of adjusting to another culture as an adopted child or immigrant. In both situations individuals can experience greater difficultly in adjusting if they are put in an environment where the majority of the population is not of their race. In these situations it can be difficult for individuals to find “a sense of identity and belonging” (Kirk and Okazawa-Rey, p. 367). It often takes a sense of community and acceptance in order for individuals to adjust to their new environment.
Here is the article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/emily-champion/post_8624_b_6173840.html
I really like the article you chose and thought it showed a really interesting perspective on race and adoption. Being a second generation Chinese American I can understand her struggle with being identified as Chinese but not being able to speak Mandarin. Both parents are not native speakers so I could not learn very much from them. Even some of my aunts and uncles have told me I should feel bad for not being able to speak Mandarin. I don't think it's anyone's place to make someone feel ashamed because they can't speak the language from the culture they identify with.
I'm in a similar situation as you Cheryl where I'm a second generation Thai American and I often get questions from people who ask if I speak Thai and then get questioned as to why I don't know the language. Just because you come from a certain ethnic background, you should not be expected to represent that country or ethnicity in a certain way, either by speaking the language or following the cultural normative patterns. I feel that one's own personal upbringing background is more representative of someone as opposed to their ethnic backgrounds, but of course these may be fused.
As a 2nd generation Filipino American I see where Cheryl and Jennifer are coming from. Being one of the few people in my family who was born in the US, I'm seen as "whitewashed" because I don't speak Tagalog or follow cultural norms. When I'm around my family, it can be hard to find that "sense of identity and belonging" (Kirk and Okazawa-Rey, 367). However, I think identity and belonging can be found in the communities of a person's culture and upbringing.
I found a particularly interesting article that reveals how overseas manufacturing have affected women workers negatively (Potentially not safe for work/school/etc.):
This news article describes the life of one Ms. Kim Hee-eun and her son Gunoo, who have both faced physical health problems in their lives. This is because of how the mother, Ms. Kim Hee-eun, worked in one of Samsung’s factories and was exposed to chemicals while manufacturing electronic products. This resulted in illnesses plaguing both her and her son, forcing the family to pay for expensive medical treatments, in addition to suffering from mental and physical pain due to how Samsung has not provided adequate care for them.
While this article does not discuss how these materials are necessarily exported to other countries, it does cover one particular case of how a family was devastated through what Kirk and Okazawa-Rey call the “Global Factory” (373). This global factory involves the production of goods by women around the whole world, which produces consumer goods that more people can purchase at the cost of the women’s working areas and health (373). Despite efforts to fight against this lack of care, the two authors note how very easy it is for companies to move manufacturing to other regions (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, 373). This incident is not isolated to just Samsung, but also applies to companies that use overseas factories for cheaper labor and more profit (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, 373). Such is the way of globalization, as noted in Table 8.1 on Kirk and Okazawa-Rey’s reading (370). Massive changes are needed to reform overseas work and support workers from becoming injured.
This article was so heartbreaking. But it is awareness of these issues that can help change consumer opinions. Many of these electronics companies like Samsung and Apple still hold relatively good reputations in the US, but just like blood diamonds their dark side will become exposed as more stories from injured workers hit the press.
This article shows a lot of intersectionality between women's rights and capitalism. Clearly, the capitalist mantra of profit by any means hurts disadvantaged workers, who so often are women. It is so hard to target what the solutions to capitalist-spawned problems are, but consuming fewer goods, and becoming educated about what we do choose to purchase is at least a start.
I found a shocking article about women and their insecurities about their bodies and where these insecurities might stem from and what possible solutions are.
A part of the reading that stood out to me for this week in Making Sexism Visible by Deborah A. Gerson, was that women were not only there for each other in terms of oppression because of political inequalities. Women were also there for each other for any metal insecurities or societal belittling that they felt. In the reading, women talked about insecurities with their bodies, and how sensitive the subject was because of the social stigmas of not fitting into the “perfect American woman” ideal. Body image is one of the subjects that women confided in each other to help them get through their mental “secrets”. “How we felt about out flesh, our sex, our faces, our muscles, our minds; how we were too short, too tall, too fat, too loud, too desiring, too cold – our secrets were exposed”(Gerson, 172). In the online article by Shaun Dreisbach, she uncovers how insecure women are by a survey she constructed. A shocking 97% of women admitted to having at least one “I hate my body” moment. There is a section of her article that is titled: “Why your body may not be the problem”. This brings me back to the idea that society is one of the main contributors to this societal problem amongst women. This brings out insecurities in women, which will ultimately give males an advantage in the societal world. This is why women formed small groups, to help empower themselves and feel more comfortable as women overall.
I'm one of the girls having "I have my body" moment. That feeling works positively and negatively, but only the negative aspect is always focused on, I think. I do not think to pursue "the standard beauty" is bad because anybody want to be admitted as a beautiful women by others. The motivation has been making culture. I think the problem is that the media brings the negative aspect too often. I assume most of the women are more thoughtful than the media reports.
When we had read the chapter about the US's prison industry and the criminilization of women, especially women of color, I, like most other people probably, couldn't help but feel reminded of "Orange is the New Black." I feel as if the show has actually brought to light some of the abuse that women in prison face to a certain extent. Of course, the fact that it is a TV show means that it can't be EXTREMELY accurate, but the show does do a very good job with pointing out the flaws in the American prison system and its treatment of queer women and women of color as well as makes viewers aware of the system that they are endorsing with their taxes.
Its always interesting to see how popular TV shows can bring light and attention to topics of importance. I found it interesting to see how much attention Lavern Cox was able to bring to the trans gender community through the show and how much more accepting people became once they saw and heard her story and transformation.
That television show is truly something to watch. There are so many issues in the system that are brought to light, although there has been some backlash due to how the male characters are written maybe because that is in fact how some act? True there is inaccuracy its for entertainment but in the same instance it is nice to see television shows bring to light issues that are in the system and repeatedly bring them up in order to demonstrate them.
I enjoy watching this show because it somewhat correctly depicts American prisons. They are not treated equally as the white woman (the lead character) gets special treatment at first from the main prison guard because he likes her. The other ladies notice and soon start treating her badly because of the bias. The guards are corrupt and use intimidation and sexual connotation to enforce rules or get what they want. It also brings light because the women do not take their crap and rebel back in amusing ways.
An issue I'm sure many of you have heard about recently is the fraternity gang rape that occurred at UVA. For those of you who don't, Rolling Stone magazine came out with an article written by a girl named Jackie, who told her story of going to a frat party, and getting raped by a group of several boys repeatedly. She then confides in her friends about the incident only to receive little support, while the boys went on with their lives and received no punishment for their actions. About a week later, Rolling Stone magazine retracted the article and explained that their were discrepancies in her story, essentially writing off the entire occurrence as false. People have taken to the internet to bash Jackie and have been focusing on the myth that women often report rape falsely, rather than still focusing on the main issue here: rape culture within universities. Whether Jackie was forced to have oral sex or intercourse with men at the party, is irrelevant. Whether these men were brothers of the fraternity or not, is irrelevant. Whether her friends picked her up in front of the party or a mile away, is irrelevant. The main point here is that a girl was forced to do things she didn't want to do and her story brings light to many important issues. Rape is all to prevalent on college campuses around the country, those responsible don't face any consequences, and schools aren't responding in effective ways. Jackie shouldn't be blamed for whatever discrepancies exist in her story, she should be celebrated for her bravery of coming forward when everybody told her not to, when she knew what an outcast she would become, and how difficult it would be. She went against the norm and talked about something that likely other UVA women have experienced and hoped to bring in a much needed change in perspective regarding rape culture on college campuses.
That sucks! I do remember reading about a girl who also reported a rape in her campus, but no one really did much about it, as the guy who did it, is still walking around enrolled in her campus. So she took to a type of protest where she carried around a kind of mattress with her everywhere she went to show the emotional weight of carrying around that feeling of being a rape victim and no one doing anything about it. There were pictures I saw where students actually helped her carry the mattress around, and I thought that was great.
I found an article that came out a while back about the 'gay panic defense' and it really surprised me how long it took for someone to try to get rid of this "defense". http://www.advocate.com/crime/2014/09/29/california-becomes-first-state-ban-gay-trans-panic-defenses In the article it talks about how Jerry Brown helps CA becomes the first state to ban the 'gay panic defense', but I find it crazy that people would go so low as to even make a name for this defense, let alone use it. For anyone who doesn't know what this defense is, it is a defense used in court to help lessen people's sentences after they have killed or brutally beaten and injured a member of the LBGTQIA community. Using the defense states that defendants actions are justified by their shock of finding out a persons sexual orientation and that it causes a psychological issue with the person making them not be fully responsible for attacking or killing a person. Along with article I found another one about how a new law in CA was created that will make it transgender people's gender will be respected after death and I think this new law is amazing and is good step in the right direction for our countries future. http://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/09/28/new-law-gives-trans-californians-respect-after-death
The chapter 10 of women in the military in Women’s Lives reminded me of the film my class saw in my other women studies class about women of the 1940s and their progression into “man’s” jobs during World War II while they went off to war. The movie showed the women moving into the working sphere, being in factories assembling the planes and their engines used in the war, putting rivets in a bomber, operating cranes, and so on. The announcer shows how awesome it is that their fulfilling their patriotic duty, but males it clear that the women are in this section of the working sphere just until the men get back, and they can go back to their homes. I suggest giving the video a watch. It is set in 1943 and there are many instances that make me laugh in the way women are perceived due to the different times then, “it’s a long jump from beauty operator to crane operator, but when her brother is over there, sister can make that jump.” <-there is a lot where that came from haha. Women even then, were a part of the military sector, and they have come a long way, but as we can see, things still need to change for the women as well. http://youtu.be/1dgUZdJjguk
Omg! I think I've seen this video too. It was in woman studies 70 correct? Well yeah, I remember seeing a video about the war and how women had the chance to work with men. They were allowed to move up in job position because women were needed to help in the war. Sometimes the women would do a better job than the men.
This article is about Angelina Jolie’s kids want to have a tattoo, but parents don’t allow them. Even though both Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have many tattoos, they don’t allow their children to have a tattoo. Brad Pitt said no to especially daughters, and “For some reason men get a little more sensitive when the daughter gets a tattoo.” I think it is very interesting because parents, especially a father, try to control their daughter’s body for some reason, as the article said. I ’m not sure how American parents think about a pre-married daughter, and how having a tattoo is considered. I assume because having a tattoo is getting damage to your body and lack of complicity. A disfigured women might not get married? Then, how about having a pierce? My mother, kind of old-fashion, doesn’t allow me to pierce my ears because she gave a birth me with complete body, so it is offensive for her to disfigure my body by myself. In Japan, a tattoo is considered as Yakuza, Japanese Mafia, therefore, having a tattoo is socially unacceptable. If you have a tattoo, it is hard to get a job, even you have a tattoo in unrevealed place. Also pierce is unacceptable to older generations like my mother. However, the US is not like that, having tattoo and pierce is not rare, so why women having tattoo is problem?
GLOUMER “Angelina Jolie reveals her kids already want tattoos” http://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/news/celebrity/2014/12/10/angelina-jolie-brad-pitt-kids-tattoos
In my own experience, I've noticed that attitudes about tattoos and piercings seem to be largely based on generation. Much of the baby boomer and older generations tend to be very strict about tattoos and piercings. My grandparents believe that tattoos are a sin, and they immediately judge people with tattoos as uneducated or unskilled. My parents' generation seems to be more open, although like the article shows, there is still a stigma attached to body modification. Hopefully our generation and beyond will be more accepting of what people choose to do with their bodies.
My grandmother and mother were born and raised in Mexico so they have strict believes and would kill me if I got a tattoo. I, on the other hand, do want one. I do not share the same believes as them because I come from this generation and I believe that we tend to be more lenient and more accepting. We own our bodies so we should be able to do as we please to them. As the generations continue, we see people conforming to society so I hope the piercings and tattoos dilemma will fade out.
This article is about the new guidelines that ban federal law enforcement from profiling on the basis of religion, national origin and other characteristic. The articles states that this is not in response to the recent cases of police violence. However, what surprises me is that this was not already established and that it took five years to pass. This means that in America, people still believe that certain races are more likely to be criminals than not. This is related to why there are more people of color in prisons, as the textbook mentions in the chapter on prison and criminalization. Hopefully this guideline will have some affect on the federal level, however, local and state law enforcements do not have abide by it, so progress will be limited
I am curious as well to see if this law will be successful in getting police officers to not racially profile those they are arresting. However, the article does not appear to mention anything about how bias can affect the courts in which these trials take place. While being arrested plays a large part in the biased sentencing of some compared to others, how these individuals are sentenced through the courts will differ depending on race and gender of the person in question (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, Figure 9.1, 423). Kirk & Okazawa-Rey also note that the sentencing process results in a longer prison sentence for African Americans than white Americans, despite how the crimes they both have performed are somewhat similar (493).
http://www.news10.net/story/news/local/2014/12/05/friends-and-family-say-folsom-boy-was-bullied-for-being-a-cheerleader/19937151/ Recently a young boy from my hometown committed suicide after being continually bullied for being a male cheerleader. The story has since gained international media attention and after seeing it around the internet so much I thought it would be a good topic in relation to this class. I thought this was particularly relevant to the gendering of male and female activities as well as the “fag discourse,” where boys are judged as “fags” for engaging in activities that are considered to be primarily feminine or which suggest homosexuality. The fact that certain activities are coded so exclusively for one gender or another to the point where young children are driven to kill themselves because they are made to feel that they don’t fit in deeply saddens me. When children are causing their own classmates to commit suicide because they have been socialized to call out anyone different from the socially accepted norm, it’s a sign that there is something deeply wrong with the structure of our society.
Wow reading this article definitely saddens me as well. In today's society, so many kids feel like they should punish someone else just because they don't fit in with social norms. It's so sad that this young boys only solution to make this situation better was to commit suicide.
I just read an article that was posted in the New York Times today about marriage and the division between the upper and lower class. The author believes that divorce rates are lower in upper class families because they have adapted better to social changes like gender roles. He believes that it is also because upper class people are less promiscuous and wait longer after knowing someone to get married. The devision in divorce rates, however, are more due to the fact that upper class families are more economically stable, which takes a large burden off of the family and does not lead to a lot of other issues in the household. Economic problems lead to disparities in marriages a lot of the time when lower class families have parents who have to work multiple jobs just to make ends meat. Also, in upper class families divorce is seen in a much more negative light in communities which may cause couples who are not happy together to still stay married. The author also believes that divorce rates can decrease in lower class families by adapting more interchangeable gender roles from the upper class. He believes that they need to equalize the roles of the breadwinner and child rearer. This does not take into the account though that many of these families have to work multiple jobs, which means they have to pay for more child care as they have less time to raise kids. A way to actually aid in the decrease of divorce rates would be to increase minimum wage so people could actually make a living wage on not multiple, but one job each which will also provide more time for child rearing. Also, making education more affordable and accessible is a way to help lower class families rise out of poverty. With more education, more job opportunities open that have better pay. Here is the article:http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-the-imitation-of-marriage.html?_r=0
So growing up I was given free range on playing with toys, mostly because everyone I grew up was a boy and the girls were younger than me to play with. One Christmas one of the girls in the family tried to play with another boy's toy only to be told by her mother to stop as it was a boys toy. I believe the toy was either a truck or a type of building set. I couldn't fathom why it would be bad to play with one, there's no harm in playing with a different toy. I even told her about it, she ignored me and continued to press the girl to play with her doll instead. This was before I took this class and yet even then I was aware of these sort of restrictions to certain items that made no sense as the children were so young. Any one have similar experiences?
I have had similar experiences as well. My parents are very strict in upholding the "manly" figure. I have 4 sisters and one brother, so my brother has grown up in a household full of girls since my dad is always at work. Many of us share a love for stuffed animals, including my brother, but my parents tell him that we should donate his because he's a boy and he shouldn't be sleeping with them. Also, whenever he exhibits any form of emotion that is seen as "feminine," they tell him, "Stop, you're a boy, boy's don't do that." I always found this annoying because everyone has their own interests and characteristics and shouldn't have to feel as if they have to conceal parts of themselves due to not conforming to stereotypical gender norms.
I came across an article that explained how gender roles were starting to switch and how more women are in the workforce now than they have ever been. Although this is great news, the gender stereotypes have stopped women from being able to break the glass ceiling and climb the ladder. The articles cites that 9/10 people would love to see gender equality amongst jobs, but it will take a lot for it to change because of gender stereotypes. The book mentions some stereotypes such as the female will get pregnant and not pay attention to her job/will eventually leave because of child. I believe this is so unbelievable sexist because children do not have as big of an impact as they used to on working. Now there are more programs to help working mothers with kids so not hiring women to have the same positions as men is not right.
This article says that the number of women in the US between 25 and 54 dropped from 74 to 69 percent. One factor seems to be a lack of pro family policies. In European countries, pro family policies are expanding, and in France, women are encouraged to work. In lecture, it was mentioned that the nuclear family isn't the statistical norm, yet it's subsidized by the government. It can be assumed that the European pro family policies also benefit the nuclear family, but leaves out what it does for non nuclear families. Another factor is also traditional gender roles, shown in a 2007 survey where 41% of adults thought it was bad if a working mother had a young child, and men expected their careers to be more important. In lecture we covered gendered division of labor, and it's surprising to see that who does what hasn't changed much.
Last year I remember seeing a video in my WMS70 class called The Donna Reed Show. This show showed how gender roles were strictly enforced. Women had to be the housewife and take all The responsibilities of taking care of the children, cooking and cleaning. There was a specific episode that showed Donna's daughter reading an essay aloud during an assembly and the essay talked about her appreciation for her mother. Her daughter made Donna look as if she was the only one taking care of them and raising them. When in fact it was two parents raising the girl. Later in the show the husband is jealous because he doesn't feel appreciated enough for what he does for the family and he doesn't believe in women getting credit for what they do at home. The father doesn't believe in cooking and cleaning as being something to appreciate. Father feels like it's just a norm thing to do. That it isn't a really big deal.
The other night my friend was telling me about an argument she and her boyfriend had. She told about how her boyfriend would want his future wife to stay at home while he makes the money. She was telling me how she did not agree to what he wanted because she does not think that women should feel they need to stay at home while their husband provides. I definitely agree with how my friend feels. In today's society is needed for both parents to work in order to provide for the whole family. Growing up, my parents both worked to provide for our family. Women should be allowed to choose a career for themselves and have the choice to work outside of the home just like men.
This article relates closely to our conversation in discussion section about racist and insensitive Halloween costumes. The events in the article happened this fall at the University of Chicago. This Halloween, a number of students at the university dressed in costumes stereotyping Mexicans. In response, Victor Perez and other students sent a letter to the university and created a Change.org petition calling for greater cultural diversity and sensitivity on campus. Afterwards, an anonymous facebook post threatened Perez for his activism, leading to an investigation by campus officials and federal authorities. The university has released statements in sympathy with members of the university who have experienced discrimination, but students like Perez remain unsatisfied with the university’s lukewarm response. Students responded by holding a demonstration on campus to bring attention to the need for greater cultural diversity, especially for students of color.
ReplyDeleteWhat I find most troubling about the University of Chicago’s response to student activists is their focus on the facebook threat, instead of deeper roots of discrimination and intolerance on the campus. By doing this, UChicago officials are avoiding admitting larger problems in the university community. The incident parallels the UC Davis CoHo sit-in protests a couple years ago, when students reacted against a “Mexican themed” party hosted by student employees of the CoHo.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/21/university-of-chicago-facebook-threat_n_6199892.html?utm_hp_ref=black-voices&ir=Black%20Voices
Its really frustrating to hear about colleges all over the country having parties that mock students of color and have the colleges do nothing about it. All over there have been reports about college students throwing parties that discriminate against their peers, yet the colleges fail to do anything to stop it from happening again and again.Colleges really need to do something to stop their students to lessen the cultural gap to put an end to these attacks on people of color through the forms of parties.
DeleteSo, I decided to go Black Friday shopping this Thanksgiving evening, and I would like to share what happened to me during my attempt to make a purchase and its relation to reinforcing the gender binary.
ReplyDeleteIn the first store I decided to go into, I found a shirt that I wanted, but the sale only applied if you buy 2 or more items. I didn't find anything else I wanted, thus I asked my friend to buy my shirt with his 2 items so I could also get the discount. However, we were not able to complete the transaction due to the policy of the sale which was that you cannot mix items of "different gender" for the promotion to be applied. I asked the cashier why this was, and he said it was just the policy and that even he thought it was "stupid" and did not understand why they would implement it.
I was pretty aggravated that I was not able to purchase my item (I was definitely not paying full price for it), but this circumstance demonstrated another way that gender separation is reinforced: through retail corporations. The separation is apparent when walking into a store; if the store offers clothing for both genders, there is a distinct boundary separating the men's and women's sides. However, furthering the gender binary through sales that forced individuals to purchase items within these same gendered categories was something I did not expect. At the end of the day, it is just clothing that an individual can wear regardless of whether they identify with that gender. In the store, the policy of the sale was not apparent, even when I read the fine print.
When I went online the next morning, I saw that this policy was reinforced online as well, specifically stating in the fine print that "discounted items must be of the same gender." I do not understand why they would implement this policy as it can decrease sales when individuals are trying to buy gifts, when someone finds an item on the "other side" that they would also like or when people are buying merchandise together (i.e. in my situation).
Thank you for sharing your story. I think that the discount rule is absolutely ridiculous for many reasons. First off people should not be restricted to buying clothing of whatever gender they chose. Everyone is free to dress as they please. Another thing that I thought of is that this discount rule also not very well thought out, because many people shop for other people over the holidays. This will ultimately be problematic if you are trying to buy something for different gendered people. I would be discouraged of even shopping for that sale because of the sexist rule. As a clothing store that is ultimately trying to make money, they should know that the sale would be much more successful is they did not apply a sexist rule. There is a lot of sexism when it comes to clothing and clothing stores.
DeleteI've never heard of a store policy that restricts customers from buying items or receiving discounts because of the gender of the clothing. This seems like something that should/ would be illegal. It's odd that the store would even hold this policy, especially during the holiday season. I'm sure many customers were probably angered by this policy, and most likely caused the lines at the store to slow. Overall, this policy is plain discriminatory, and probably caused the company more trouble than they wanted.
DeleteWow that's infuriating. Because it would be absolutely ridiculous for a girl to want to buy what is considered a male shirt as well as a woman's pair of jeans, right? It seems like ignorance rather than a disregard for transgenders, but nonetheless it is unacceptable for a store to have such policies in todays society. Its that sort of ignorance and lack of attention to detail that drives customers away, and therefore results in a decrease in business, and then profits, which is what these companies care about most of course, so it actually is very surprising that they would have such a rule in place.
DeleteI found this to be so dumb. I know I personally like to buy male shirts and buy a skirt to go with it. So this means I would not be able to buy it discounted because one is intended for males and the other for females? I am so sorry you had to go through this discrimination and sexism. It is so wrong to have this sort of sale because if you want to buy something for your brother and another for your sister, you will not be able to get the discount because of the gender binary. This just doesn't make any sense.
DeleteThis week I found an article on a 15-year-old Chinese girl who was adopted and raised by two white American parents. In the article Emily Champion speaks of her experience growing up in the United States, not only as a Chinese student in a predominantly white neighborhood and school, but also as a young girl who was born with a cleft palate. She recalled experiences at school where children would mock the way she spoke, as she stated “many people thought my speech wasn’t clear because I was Chinese, not because of my cleft palate.”
ReplyDeleteBecause she had been adopted when she was only 4 years old, she did not know Mandarin. When her classmates would ask her, “Do you speak Chinese?” she stated it would “immediately make me feel bad about myself and feel ashamed because I don’t speak Mandarin.” Many of her classmates would mimic the Chinese language whenever they were around her, assuming she knew Mandarin solely because she was Chinese.
She recalled growing up in America, being stuck between two cultures, and not fully knowing how to speak Chinese or English. Because her cleft palate restricted her ability to speak and reach in English, she often felt as though she was not intelligent, even though she knew she was intelligent. Individuals around her often told her that she “should be smart ‘because I’m Asian.’”
This article was similar to the section within chapter 8 on Transnational Adoptions. Both the article and the text within the book bring about points on the difficulties of adjusting to another culture as an adopted child or immigrant. In both situations individuals can experience greater difficultly in adjusting if they are put in an environment where the majority of the population is not of their race. In these situations it can be difficult for individuals to find “a sense of identity and belonging” (Kirk and Okazawa-Rey, p. 367). It often takes a sense of community and acceptance in order for individuals to adjust to their new environment.
Here is the article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/emily-champion/post_8624_b_6173840.html
I really like the article you chose and thought it showed a really interesting perspective on race and adoption. Being a second generation Chinese American I can understand her struggle with being identified as Chinese but not being able to speak Mandarin. Both parents are not native speakers so I could not learn very much from them. Even some of my aunts and uncles have told me I should feel bad for not being able to speak Mandarin. I don't think it's anyone's place to make someone feel ashamed because they can't speak the language from the culture they identify with.
DeleteI'm in a similar situation as you Cheryl where I'm a second generation Thai American and I often get questions from people who ask if I speak Thai and then get questioned as to why I don't know the language. Just because you come from a certain ethnic background, you should not be expected to represent that country or ethnicity in a certain way, either by speaking the language or following the cultural normative patterns. I feel that one's own personal upbringing background is more representative of someone as opposed to their ethnic backgrounds, but of course these may be fused.
DeleteAs a 2nd generation Filipino American I see where Cheryl and Jennifer are coming from. Being one of the few people in my family who was born in the US, I'm seen as "whitewashed" because I don't speak Tagalog or follow cultural norms. When I'm around my family, it can be hard to find that "sense of identity and belonging" (Kirk and Okazawa-Rey, 367). However, I think identity and belonging can be found in the communities of a person's culture and upbringing.
DeleteI found a particularly interesting article that reveals how overseas manufacturing have affected women workers negatively (Potentially not safe for work/school/etc.):
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/01/samsung-semiconductor-children_n_6200380.html
This news article describes the life of one Ms. Kim Hee-eun and her son Gunoo, who have both faced physical health problems in their lives. This is because of how the mother, Ms. Kim Hee-eun, worked in one of Samsung’s factories and was exposed to chemicals while manufacturing electronic products. This resulted in illnesses plaguing both her and her son, forcing the family to pay for expensive medical treatments, in addition to suffering from mental and physical pain due to how Samsung has not provided adequate care for them.
While this article does not discuss how these materials are necessarily exported to other countries, it does cover one particular case of how a family was devastated through what Kirk and Okazawa-Rey call the “Global Factory” (373). This global factory involves the production of goods by women around the whole world, which produces consumer goods that more people can purchase at the cost of the women’s working areas and health (373). Despite efforts to fight against this lack of care, the two authors note how very easy it is for companies to move manufacturing to other regions (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, 373). This incident is not isolated to just Samsung, but also applies to companies that use overseas factories for cheaper labor and more profit (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, 373). Such is the way of globalization, as noted in Table 8.1 on Kirk and Okazawa-Rey’s reading (370). Massive changes are needed to reform overseas work and support workers from becoming injured.
This article was so heartbreaking. But it is awareness of these issues that can help change consumer opinions. Many of these electronics companies like Samsung and Apple still hold relatively good reputations in the US, but just like blood diamonds their dark side will become exposed as more stories from injured workers hit the press.
DeleteThis article shows a lot of intersectionality between women's rights and capitalism. Clearly, the capitalist mantra of profit by any means hurts disadvantaged workers, who so often are women. It is so hard to target what the solutions to capitalist-spawned problems are, but consuming fewer goods, and becoming educated about what we do choose to purchase is at least a start.
I found a shocking article about women and their insecurities about their bodies and where these insecurities might stem from and what possible solutions are.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.glamour.com/health-fitness/2011/02/shocking-body-image-news-97-percent-of-women-will-be-cruel-to-their-bodies-today
A part of the reading that stood out to me for this week in Making Sexism Visible by Deborah A. Gerson, was that women were not only there for each other in terms of oppression because of political inequalities. Women were also there for each other for any metal insecurities or societal belittling that they felt. In the reading, women talked about insecurities with their bodies, and how sensitive the subject was because of the social stigmas of not fitting into the “perfect American woman” ideal. Body image is one of the subjects that women confided in each other to help them get through their mental “secrets”. “How we felt about out flesh, our sex, our faces, our muscles, our minds; how we were too short, too tall, too fat, too loud, too desiring, too cold – our secrets were exposed”(Gerson, 172). In the online article by Shaun Dreisbach, she uncovers how insecure women are by a survey she constructed. A shocking 97% of women admitted to having at least one “I hate my body” moment. There is a section of her article that is titled: “Why your body may not be the problem”. This brings me back to the idea that society is one of the main contributors to this societal problem amongst women. This brings out insecurities in women, which will ultimately give males an advantage in the societal world. This is why women formed small groups, to help empower themselves and feel more comfortable as women overall.
I'm one of the girls having "I have my body" moment. That feeling works positively and negatively, but only the negative aspect is always focused on, I think. I do not think to pursue "the standard beauty" is bad because anybody want to be admitted as a beautiful women by others. The motivation has been making culture. I think the problem is that the media brings the negative aspect too often. I assume most of the women are more thoughtful than the media reports.
DeleteWhen we had read the chapter about the US's prison industry and the criminilization of women, especially women of color, I, like most other people probably, couldn't help but feel reminded of "Orange is the New Black." I feel as if the show has actually brought to light some of the abuse that women in prison face to a certain extent. Of course, the fact that it is a TV show means that it can't be EXTREMELY accurate, but the show does do a very good job with pointing out the flaws in the American prison system and its treatment of queer women and women of color as well as makes viewers aware of the system that they are endorsing with their taxes.
ReplyDeleteIts always interesting to see how popular TV shows can bring light and attention to topics of importance. I found it interesting to see how much attention Lavern Cox was able to bring to the trans gender community through the show and how much more accepting people became once they saw and heard her story and transformation.
DeleteThat television show is truly something to watch. There are so many issues in the system that are brought to light, although there has been some backlash due to how the male characters are written maybe because that is in fact how some act? True there is inaccuracy its for entertainment but in the same instance it is nice to see television shows bring to light issues that are in the system and repeatedly bring them up in order to demonstrate them.
DeleteI enjoy watching this show because it somewhat correctly depicts American prisons. They are not treated equally as the white woman (the lead character) gets special treatment at first from the main prison guard because he likes her. The other ladies notice and soon start treating her badly because of the bias. The guards are corrupt and use intimidation and sexual connotation to enforce rules or get what they want. It also brings light because the women do not take their crap and rebel back in amusing ways.
DeleteAn issue I'm sure many of you have heard about recently is the fraternity gang rape that occurred at UVA. For those of you who don't, Rolling Stone magazine came out with an article written by a girl named Jackie, who told her story of going to a frat party, and getting raped by a group of several boys repeatedly. She then confides in her friends about the incident only to receive little support, while the boys went on with their lives and received no punishment for their actions. About a week later, Rolling Stone magazine retracted the article and explained that their were discrepancies in her story, essentially writing off the entire occurrence as false. People have taken to the internet to bash Jackie and have been focusing on the myth that women often report rape falsely, rather than still focusing on the main issue here: rape culture within universities. Whether Jackie was forced to have oral sex or intercourse with men at the party, is irrelevant. Whether these men were brothers of the fraternity or not, is irrelevant. Whether her friends picked her up in front of the party or a mile away, is irrelevant. The main point here is that a girl was forced to do things she didn't want to do and her story brings light to many important issues. Rape is all to prevalent on college campuses around the country, those responsible don't face any consequences, and schools aren't responding in effective ways. Jackie shouldn't be blamed for whatever discrepancies exist in her story, she should be celebrated for her bravery of coming forward when everybody told her not to, when she knew what an outcast she would become, and how difficult it would be. She went against the norm and talked about something that likely other UVA women have experienced and hoped to bring in a much needed change in perspective regarding rape culture on college campuses.
ReplyDeleteHeres Jackie's article: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/a-rape-on-campus-20141119?page=7
Here's the withdrawal of the story: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/a-note-to-our-readers-20141205
That sucks! I do remember reading about a girl who also reported a rape in her campus, but no one really did much about it, as the guy who did it, is still walking around enrolled in her campus. So she took to a type of protest where she carried around a kind of mattress with her everywhere she went to show the emotional weight of carrying around that feeling of being a rape victim and no one doing anything about it. There were pictures I saw where students actually helped her carry the mattress around, and I thought that was great.
DeleteI found an article that came out a while back about the 'gay panic defense' and it really surprised me how long it took for someone to try to get rid of this "defense".
ReplyDeletehttp://www.advocate.com/crime/2014/09/29/california-becomes-first-state-ban-gay-trans-panic-defenses
In the article it talks about how Jerry Brown helps CA becomes the first state to ban the 'gay panic defense', but I find it crazy that people would go so low as to even make a name for this defense, let alone use it.
For anyone who doesn't know what this defense is, it is a defense used in court to help lessen people's sentences after they have killed or brutally beaten and injured a member of the LBGTQIA community. Using the defense states that defendants actions are justified by their shock of finding out a persons sexual orientation and that it causes a psychological issue with the person making them not be fully responsible for attacking or killing a person.
Along with article I found another one about how a new law in CA was created that will make it transgender people's gender will be respected after death and I think this new law is amazing and is good step in the right direction for our countries future.
http://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/09/28/new-law-gives-trans-californians-respect-after-death
The chapter 10 of women in the military in Women’s Lives reminded me of the film my class saw in my other women studies class about women of the 1940s and their progression into “man’s” jobs during World War II while they went off to war. The movie showed the women moving into the working sphere, being in factories assembling the planes and their engines used in the war, putting rivets in a bomber, operating cranes, and so on. The announcer shows how awesome it is that their fulfilling their patriotic duty, but males it clear that the women are in this section of the working sphere just until the men get back, and they can go back to their homes.
ReplyDeleteI suggest giving the video a watch. It is set in 1943 and there are many instances that make me laugh in the way women are perceived due to the different times then, “it’s a long jump from beauty operator to crane operator, but when her brother is over there, sister can make that jump.” <-there is a lot where that came from haha. Women even then, were a part of the military sector, and they have come a long way, but as we can see, things still need to change for the women as well.
http://youtu.be/1dgUZdJjguk
Omg! I think I've seen this video too. It was in woman studies 70 correct? Well yeah, I remember seeing a video about the war and how women had the chance to work with men. They were allowed to move up in job position because women were needed to help in the war. Sometimes the women would do a better job than the men.
DeleteThis article is about Angelina Jolie’s kids want to have a tattoo, but parents don’t allow them. Even though both Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have many tattoos, they don’t allow their children to have a tattoo. Brad Pitt said no to especially daughters, and “For some reason men get a little more sensitive when the daughter gets a tattoo.”
ReplyDeleteI think it is very interesting because parents, especially a father, try to control their daughter’s body for some reason, as the article said. I ’m not sure how American parents think about a pre-married daughter, and how having a tattoo is considered. I assume because having a tattoo is getting damage to your body and lack of complicity. A disfigured women might not get married? Then, how about having a pierce? My mother, kind of old-fashion, doesn’t allow me to pierce my ears because she gave a birth me with complete body, so it is offensive for her to disfigure my body by myself. In Japan, a tattoo is considered as Yakuza, Japanese Mafia, therefore, having a tattoo is socially unacceptable. If you have a tattoo, it is hard to get a job, even you have a tattoo in unrevealed place. Also pierce is unacceptable to older generations like my mother. However, the US is not like that, having tattoo and pierce is not rare, so why women having tattoo is problem?
GLOUMER “Angelina Jolie reveals her kids already want tattoos”
http://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/news/celebrity/2014/12/10/angelina-jolie-brad-pitt-kids-tattoos
In my own experience, I've noticed that attitudes about tattoos and piercings seem to be largely based on generation. Much of the baby boomer and older generations tend to be very strict about tattoos and piercings. My grandparents believe that tattoos are a sin, and they immediately judge people with tattoos as uneducated or unskilled. My parents' generation seems to be more open, although like the article shows, there is still a stigma attached to body modification. Hopefully our generation and beyond will be more accepting of what people choose to do with their bodies.
DeleteMy grandmother and mother were born and raised in Mexico so they have strict believes and would kill me if I got a tattoo. I, on the other hand, do want one. I do not share the same believes as them because I come from this generation and I believe that we tend to be more lenient and more accepting. We own our bodies so we should be able to do as we please to them. As the generations continue, we see people conforming to society so I hope the piercings and tattoos dilemma will fade out.
DeleteThis article is about the new guidelines that ban federal law enforcement from profiling on the basis of religion, national origin and other characteristic. The articles states that this is not in response to the recent cases of police violence. However, what surprises me is that this was not already established and that it took five years to pass. This means that in America, people still believe that certain races are more likely to be criminals than not. This is related to why there are more people of color in prisons, as the textbook mentions in the chapter on prison and criminalization. Hopefully this guideline will have some affect on the federal level, however, local and state law enforcements do not have abide by it, so progress will be limited
ReplyDeletehttp://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/Racial-profiling-banned-for-federal-law-officers-5943333.php
I am curious as well to see if this law will be successful in getting police officers to not racially profile those they are arresting. However, the article does not appear to mention anything about how bias can affect the courts in which these trials take place. While being arrested plays a large part in the biased sentencing of some compared to others, how these individuals are sentenced through the courts will differ depending on race and gender of the person in question (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, Figure 9.1, 423). Kirk & Okazawa-Rey also note that the sentencing process results in a longer prison sentence for African Americans than white Americans, despite how the crimes they both have performed are somewhat similar (493).
Deletehttp://www.news10.net/story/news/local/2014/12/05/friends-and-family-say-folsom-boy-was-bullied-for-being-a-cheerleader/19937151/
ReplyDeleteRecently a young boy from my hometown committed suicide after being continually bullied for being a male cheerleader. The story has since gained international media attention and after seeing it around the internet so much I thought it would be a good topic in relation to this class. I thought this was particularly relevant to the gendering of male and female activities as well as the “fag discourse,” where boys are judged as “fags” for engaging in activities that are considered to be primarily feminine or which suggest homosexuality. The fact that certain activities are coded so exclusively for one gender or another to the point where young children are driven to kill themselves because they are made to feel that they don’t fit in deeply saddens me. When children are causing their own classmates to commit suicide because they have been socialized to call out anyone different from the socially accepted norm, it’s a sign that there is something deeply wrong with the structure of our society.
Wow reading this article definitely saddens me as well. In today's society, so many kids feel like they should punish someone else just because they don't fit in with social norms. It's so sad that this young boys only solution to make this situation better was to commit suicide.
DeleteI just read an article that was posted in the New York Times today about marriage and the division between the upper and lower class. The author believes that divorce rates are lower in upper class families because they have adapted better to social changes like gender roles. He believes that it is also because upper class people are less promiscuous and wait longer after knowing someone to get married. The devision in divorce rates, however, are more due to the fact that upper class families are more economically stable, which takes a large burden off of the family and does not lead to a lot of other issues in the household. Economic problems lead to disparities in marriages a lot of the time when lower class families have parents who have to work multiple jobs just to make ends meat. Also, in upper class families divorce is seen in a much more negative light in communities which may cause couples who are not happy together to still stay married. The author also believes that divorce rates can decrease in lower class families by adapting more interchangeable gender roles from the upper class. He believes that they need to equalize the roles of the breadwinner and child rearer. This does not take into the account though that many of these families have to work multiple jobs, which means they have to pay for more child care as they have less time to raise kids. A way to actually aid in the decrease of divorce rates would be to increase minimum wage so people could actually make a living wage on not multiple, but one job each which will also provide more time for child rearing. Also, making education more affordable and accessible is a way to help lower class families rise out of poverty. With more education, more job opportunities open that have better pay. Here is the article:http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-the-imitation-of-marriage.html?_r=0
ReplyDeleteSo growing up I was given free range on playing with toys, mostly because everyone I grew up was a boy and the girls were younger than me to play with. One Christmas one of the girls in the family tried to play with another boy's toy only to be told by her mother to stop as it was a boys toy. I believe the toy was either a truck or a type of building set. I couldn't fathom why it would be bad to play with one, there's no harm in playing with a different toy. I even told her about it, she ignored me and continued to press the girl to play with her doll instead. This was before I took this class and yet even then I was aware of these sort of restrictions to certain items that made no sense as the children were so young. Any one have similar experiences?
ReplyDeleteI have had similar experiences as well. My parents are very strict in upholding the "manly" figure. I have 4 sisters and one brother, so my brother has grown up in a household full of girls since my dad is always at work. Many of us share a love for stuffed animals, including my brother, but my parents tell him that we should donate his because he's a boy and he shouldn't be sleeping with them. Also, whenever he exhibits any form of emotion that is seen as "feminine," they tell him, "Stop, you're a boy, boy's don't do that." I always found this annoying because everyone has their own interests and characteristics and shouldn't have to feel as if they have to conceal parts of themselves due to not conforming to stereotypical gender norms.
DeleteI came across an article that explained how gender roles were starting to switch and how more women are in the workforce now than they have ever been. Although this is great news, the gender stereotypes have stopped women from being able to break the glass ceiling and climb the ladder. The articles cites that 9/10 people would love to see gender equality amongst jobs, but it will take a lot for it to change because of gender stereotypes. The book mentions some stereotypes such as the female will get pregnant and not pay attention to her job/will eventually leave because of child. I believe this is so unbelievable sexist because children do not have as big of an impact as they used to on working. Now there are more programs to help working mothers with kids so not hiring women to have the same positions as men is not right.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/upshot/us-employment-women-not-working.html?abt=0002&abg=0&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article says that the number of women in the US between 25 and 54 dropped from 74 to 69 percent. One factor seems to be a lack of pro family policies. In European countries, pro family policies are expanding, and in France, women are encouraged to work. In lecture, it was mentioned that the nuclear family isn't the statistical norm, yet it's subsidized by the government. It can be assumed that the European pro family policies also benefit the nuclear family, but leaves out what it does for non nuclear families. Another factor is also traditional gender roles, shown in a 2007 survey where 41% of adults thought it was bad if a working mother had a young child, and men expected their careers to be more important. In lecture we covered gendered division of labor, and it's surprising to see that who does what hasn't changed much.
Last year I remember seeing a video in my WMS70 class called The Donna Reed Show. This show showed how gender roles were strictly enforced. Women had to be the housewife and take all The responsibilities of taking care of the children, cooking and cleaning. There was a specific episode that showed Donna's daughter reading an essay aloud during an assembly and the essay talked about her appreciation for her mother. Her daughter made Donna look as if she was the only one taking care of them and raising them. When in fact it was two parents raising the girl. Later in the show the husband is jealous because he doesn't feel appreciated enough for what he does for the family and he doesn't believe in women getting credit for what they do at home. The father doesn't believe in cooking and cleaning as being something to appreciate. Father feels like it's just a norm thing to do. That it isn't a really big deal.
ReplyDeleteThe other night my friend was telling me about an argument she and her boyfriend had. She told about how her boyfriend would want his future wife to stay at home while he makes the money. She was telling me how she did not agree to what he wanted because she does not think that women should feel they need to stay at home while their husband provides. I definitely agree with how my friend feels. In today's society is needed for both parents to work in order to provide for the whole family. Growing up, my parents both worked to provide for our family. Women should be allowed to choose a career for themselves and have the choice to work outside of the home just like men.
ReplyDelete